Assessing Food Preferences Among Persons With Profound Mental Retardation: Providing Opportunities to Make Choices

Abstract

Increased attention has been directed recently to assisting persons with severe handicaps to express preferences concerning events in their lives. We evaluated a program for assessing choice-making skills to provide opportunities for persons with profound mental retardation to express food and drink preferences. In Experiment 1, the assessment procedure involving repeated, paired-item presentations resulted in active choice making and the identification of preferences for all 5 participants. Results also indicated that caregiver opinion was not predictive of participant food and drink preferences. A survey of service providers supported the importance of meal-related choices in this population. In Experiment 2, the practicality of the assessment procedure was supported by demonstrating that (a) routine caregivers could apply the procedure with appropriate supervision to provide choice opportunities, and (b) results of the procedure were predictive of participant choices when a less structured and more normal opportunity to express a preference was provided during regular mealtimes. Results are discussed in terms ofextending the developing technology ofpreference and reinforcer identification to other important areas for persons with severe disabilities.

Eliciting user perspectives on what works

“…A number of studies which have elicited the views of people with learning diculties and sta in residential homes have reported a marked divergence of view about the level of choice available (Jenkinson et al, 1992;Stanclie, 1991). Although Newton et al (1993) found that sta were generally successful at rating people's preferences, Parsons and Reid (1990) report that caregiver opinion was not predictive of users' preferences. However, it can be useful to obtain some background information from sta or relatives about an individual's likes and dislikes, pastimes and the names of any particular friends or favourite haunts: some respondents may assume the interviewer has prior knowledge of these details or they may not provide the context necessary for the researcher to follow all they are saying (Atkinson, 1988).…”

Video Preference Assessment of Students with Autism for Watching Self, Adults, or Peers

“…Formal testing procedures have involved presenting single items (Green et al, 1988;Pace, Ivancic, Edwards, Iwata, & Page, 1985;Piazza, Fisher, Hanley, Hilker, & Derby, 1996), pairs of items (Dattilo & Mirenda, 1987;Fisher et al, 1992;Parsons & Reid, 1990), and arrays of multiple stimuli (Carr et al, 2000;DeLeon & Iwata, 1996;Mason, McGee, FarmerDougan, & Risley, 1989;Roane, Vollmer, Ringdahl, & Marcus, 1998), while measuring students' approach to items, length of engagement, and number of selections per item across trials. Procedures in the current study were similar to those reported by Windsor et al (1994), who presented an array of six items, and Fisher et al (1992), who presented pairs of stimuli, except that three stimuli (Carr et al, 2000) were presented in the array.…”

An evaluation of the overjustification effect across multiple contingency arrangements

“…Prior to the evaluation of the overjustification effect, high-preference and lowpreference leisure activities identified by a paired choice preference assessment (Parsons & Reid, 1990) were evaluated in an effort to identify a stimulus that functioned as a reinforcer and a stimulus that did not result in increased responding (i.e., a non-reinforcing stimulus). Social praise was also evaluated.…”

“…Moderately preferred academic activities were identified by a paired choice preference assessment described by Parsons and Reid (1990). At the beginning of each session, participants were given the instruction ''You can do as much or as little of the activity as you want; it is up to you.''…”