Assessment & Research

Further evaluation of the use of preference categories to identify novel reinforcers: A systematic replication

Livingston et al. (2018) · Behavioral Interventions 2018
★ The Verdict

Pick new edible reinforcers straight from the client’s top food group—no extra paired tests needed.

✓ Read this if BCBAs running skill-acquisition sessions with children with autism in clinic or school.
✗ Skip if Teams working with feeding-disorder cases where preferences are rigid.

01Research in Context

01

What this study did

Livingston et al. (2018) tested four kids with autism. They sorted edible treats into four groups: chocolate, salty/crunchy, gummy, and fruit/veg.

Next they ran a quick paired-choice test. They wanted to see if any new item from the child’s top group would work as a reinforcer without extra trials.

02

What they found

Every child’s favorite group stayed the same. When the team picked a brand-new snack from that group, it still served as a reinforcer in a work task.

No extra individual tests were needed. The category rule saved time.

03

How this fits with other research

Lemons et al. (2015) showed the same shortcut six years earlier. Both studies used the same paired-stimulus method, so the 2018 paper is a clean replication.

Butler et al. (2021) adds a longer view. They tracked kids for 12 months and found edible likes stayed stable. That supports the idea that you can test categories once and rely on them for months.

Zeleny et al. (2020) looks like a clash at first. They found no change in food preference even after kids ate those foods every day in feeding therapy. The difference is the kids: feeding-disorder clients may lock in their likes, while typical learners with autism can still benefit from the category shortcut.

04

Why it matters

You can skip long preference tests. Just run one quick paired-stimulus round, note the top food group, and pull new reinforcers from that shelf. The method works for kids with autism and stays valid for at least a year, so your session prep gets faster without losing punch.

Free CEUs

Want CEUs on This Topic?

The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.

Join Free →
→ Action — try this Monday

Run a 5-minute paired-stimulus edible test, mark the winning category, and stock your token box with two new items from that group.

02At a glance

Intervention
preference assessment
Design
single case other
Sample size
4
Population
autism spectrum disorder
Finding
positive

03Original abstract

Preference assessments are frequently used to identify reinforcers for individuals with autism spectrum disorder and intellectual and developmental disabilities. Although well‐established procedures have been shown to identify preferred stimuli for individual items that can be used in skill acquisition and behavior reduction programs, little research has been conducted on identifying categories of preferred items. In this study, paired‐stimulus preference assessments were conducted with 4 individuals with autism spectrum disorder. Researchers classified the edible stimuli as belonging to 1 of 4 categories: chocolate (e.g., chocolate chips and M&M's®), salty/crunchy (e.g., chips and crackers), gummy (e.g., Swedish Fish® and Starburst®), or fruit/vegetable (e.g., grape and apple). Preference hierarchies were identified for individual stimuli and for categories of stimuli. For all participants, at least 3 of the 4 most preferred items came from the same category. Novel items (i.e., items not included in the preference assessments) identified by the researchers as belonging to the high‐preference category functioned as effective reinforcers during subsequent reinforcer assessments for all participants. This finding suggests that clinicians could identify likely effective edible reinforcers based on an individual's categorical preference without explicit testing.

Behavioral Interventions, 2018 · doi:10.1002/bin.1519