An examination of stimulus technology level and preference displacement during multiple stimulus without replacement preference assessments
High-tech items steal the top spots in mixed MSWOs, so run tech-only and low-tech-only arrays when you need honest ranks.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Hoffmann et al. (2023) ran MSWO preference tests with two kinds of leisure items. One set was high-tech, like tablets and music players. The other set was low-tech, like puzzles and coloring pages.
They watched which items clients picked first and which ones kept their attention. Then they tested if the high-tech items that won the beauty contest still worked as reinforcers.
What they found
Most clients reached for the high-tech items again and again. The low-tech toys sat untouched even when clients had enjoyed them in past sessions.
When staff later used both types as rewards for work, the high-tech and low-tech items were equally powerful. The preference list had lied; clients would still work for the low-tech stuff.
How this fits with other research
Lozy et al. (2019) saw the same mismatch. Items that lost in a paired-choice test later drove the same amount of work in single-operant tasks. Together, the two studies warn us: what clients pick is not always what will fuel their work.
Wong et al. (2009) remind us that tech items carry extra visual and motor demands. Clients may grab the shiny tablet simply because it is easier to see or touch, not because they like it more.
Voss et al. (2019) added sound to toys and also shifted play patterns. Like Hoffmann, they show that changing one feature of an item can reorder the whole preference deck.
Why it matters
If you need a true rank of low-tech reinforters, run a separate MSWO that leaves tablets and phones out of sight. Keep the high-tech lineup for another day. This simple split keeps your data clean and saves you from tossing perfectly good puzzles, books, or blocks that still have reinforcing power.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Pull tablets and phones out of today’s MSWO tray and run a low-tech-only array first.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
AbstractResearchers have observed that preference for edible items may displace preference for leisure items when items from the stimulus classes are assessed together within multiple stimulus without replacement (MSWO) preference assessments. The current study extends previous research by examining patterns of preference and displacement when assessing preference for high‐tech and low‐tech leisure items. We conducted three separate MSWO preference assessments; one assessing low‐tech items, another assessing high‐tech items, and a combined assessment (using the top four high‐ and low‐tech items from the previous assessments) to test for displacement. Preference for high‐tech items fully or partially displaced preference for low‐tech items in five of eight participants. We then conducted concurrent and single operant reinforcer assessments using the highly preferred high‐tech and low‐tech items. Reinforcer assessment results demonstrated similar levels of responding for the highest preferred high‐tech and low‐tech items, indicating that combining high‐ and low‐tech items within preference assessments may influence the validity of results.
Behavioral Interventions, 2023 · doi:10.1002/bin.1937