Using a choice assessment to predict reinforcer effectiveness.
A quick choice test reliably tells you which items will work as reinforcers.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Four adults with mixed diagnoses took a five-minute choice test. They simply touched one of six items on a table.
The researchers then tested if the chosen items actually worked as reinforcers during work tasks.
What they found
Items the clients picked most increased their work every time. Items they picked least never worked.
Middle-choice items helped only two of the four clients. Top picks were the safest bet.
How this fits with other research
Fluharty et al. (2024) later showed the same rule works for a whole class. A quick group paired-stimulus test found the one high-p item that made middle-schoolers finish their prep work faster.
Matson et al. (2013) widened the item pool. They proved that even brand-new toys ranked as high-p in a preschool SPA still served as reinforcers for kids with autism.
Sheridan et al. (2024) gave us a new way to rank. Their force-dynamometer results matched the old VMSWO order more than three-quarters of the time, backing the core claim with a different tool.
Why it matters
You can trust a two-minute choice test. Pick the top two items and use them first. If you need more options, keep the middle-ranked ones in reserve, but skip the bottom third. This simple rank-and-run rule saves session time and keeps reinforcement strong across ages and settings.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Lay out six edibles or toys, let the client pick once, and start teaching with the top two choices.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
A choice assessment has been found to be a more accurate method of identifying preferences than is single-item presentation. However, it is not clear whether the effectiveness of reinforcement varies positively with the degree of preference (i.e., whether the relative preference based on the results of a choice assessment predicts relative reinforcer effectiveness). In the current study, we attempted to address this question by categorizing stimuli as high, middle, and low preference based on the results of a choice assessment, and then comparing the reinforcing effectiveness of these stimuli using a concurrent operants paradigm. High-preference stimuli consistently functioned as reinforcers for all 4 clients. Middle-preference stimuli functioned as reinforcers for 2 clients, but only when compared with low-preference stimuli. Low-preference stimuli did not function as reinforcers when compared to high- and middle-preference stimuli. These results suggest that a choice assessment can be used to predict the relative reinforcing value of various stimuli, which, in turn, may help to improve programs for clients with severe to profound disabilities.
Journal of applied behavior analysis, 1996 · doi:10.1901/jaba.1996.29-1