A Continuum of Methods for Assessing Preference for Conversation Topics
Use the response-restriction conversation assessment (RRCA) to find topics that actually keep kids with ASD talking, not just ones they say they like.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team compared three ways to pick conversation topics for kids with ASD.
They asked ten children what they liked, ran an MSWO with photos, and tried a new response-restriction test.
Each child went through all three methods in one session.
What they found
All three tests pointed to a favorite topic.
Only the new RRCA test showed which topic kept the child talking the longest.
In other words, kids said they liked trains, but only RRCA showed trains would keep them chatting.
How this fits with other research
Wolfe et al. (2018) saw the same gap with social play. Their video test sometimes picked items that later flopped as reinforcers.
Guérin et al. (2017) pushed video MSWO for non-verbal kids choosing animals. Kronfli adds live talk to that MSWO line.
Scahill et al. (2015) warned that many ASD tools need a real-world check. RRCA answers that call by testing actual talk time, not just a click or a photo choice.
Why it matters
Stop trusting what kids say they like. Run a two-minute RRCA first: block one topic and watch which one they fight to keep. Use that topic in mand trials, social groups, or break times. You will get longer, richer conversation right away.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Pick one client, block their claimed favorite topic for 30 s, and record which topic they try to regain—then use that topic in your next mand session.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Among individuals with a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorders (ASD), conversation topic preference could influence social skills in many ways. For example, an individual with advanced vocal-verbal skills, but just learning to join a conversation, might be less inclined to participate if the topic chosen is not preferred. However, commonly used preference assessment procedures have not been applied to evaluating conversation-topic preferences. Therefore, the purpose of the current experiment was to conduct three different types of assessments that varied in efficiency, the degree of certainty they allow, and clients with whom they are likely to be applicable and acceptable. In particular, we conducted a self-report preference assessment, a multiple-stimulus-without-replacement (MSWO) preference assessment, and a response restriction conversation assessment (RRCA). Each assessment identified a preferred topic of conversation, but the RRCA was the only assessment that was able to differentiate which topics would maintain a conversation. Implications for assessment and intervention procedures related to complex social skills are discussed and directions for future research are proposed.
Behavior Analysis in Practice, 2024 · doi:10.1007/s40617-023-00842-9