Clinical decision making and preference assessment for individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

Virues-Ortega et al. (2014) read every paper they could find on preference assessments for people with intellectual or developmental disabilities.

They built a simple flow-chart that tells you which assessment to use first, second, or third.

The chart matches the person’s skills, time you have, and the item you need to test.

The team did not run new experiments. Instead they sorted old ones into a clear map.

The map shows when to pick a single-stimulus test, a paired-choice, or a multiple-stimulus test.

Using the map saves time and keeps you from always starting with the same old method.

Dudley et al. (2019) asked families who really makes the choices. They found siblings, not staff, pick most formal options. Javier’s map still helps you measure what the person likes, but you must loop the sibling in when the final say happens.

Corby et al. (2015) showed interviews can work for people with mild ID. Javier’s chart puts interviews last for this group, yet Deirdre’s finding hints you might move interviews up the list if the person can talk easily.

Werner et al. (2012) warned that many stigma scales lack solid theory. Javier’s model avoids that trap by linking each preference tool to the skill level of the client, not to the tool’s popularity.

Next time you plan a preference assessment, open the Javier flow-chart first. Pick the tool that fits your client’s communication level and the minutes you have. Stop running the same paired-stimulus test by habit. You will get cleaner data and faster sessions, and your client will thank you with clearer approach responses.