Demonstration of a negative reinforcement preference assessment to determine aversiveness of types of social interaction

Slocum et al. (2022) built a quick test that ranks how much a client wants to escape different social interactions. They timed how fast four people left each type of interaction. Shorter escape times meant the interaction was more aversive.

The team then lined up the interactions from least to most aversive. They used that line to plan a fading program for one client.

Every participant showed a clear order of "I want out" speed. The fastest escape told the team which social moment the client disliked most.

When the staff faded demands along that order, problem behavior stayed low while the client accepted tougher interactions.

Morris et al. (2019) created the SIPA to find preferred social moments. Slocum flips the same idea to find the ones kids want to avoid. Together you now have a full social map: what to approach and what to escape.

Porter et al. (2020) later used Slocum’s latency list to pick aversive tasks for a self-control study. Their success shows the hierarchy travels well to new questions.

Morris et al. (2023) reviewed social preference tools and crowned video-based tests as best. That review looked for reinforcers, not aversives, so there is no clash—just two different targets.

If your client bolts when you lean in, talk loud, or add eye contact, you can now measure which of these triggers the fastest escape. Run the five-minute latency test, build the least-to-most line, and start treatment with the easiest social demand. You will fade in the tough ones with fewer meltdowns and no extra guesswork.