Shifting Preferences for Choice-Making Opportunities through Histories of Differential Reinforcer Immediacy

Gifford, Margaret R.; Drifke, Melissa A.; Tiger, Jeffrey H.; Caldwell, R. Kyle

doi:10.1007/s40732-020-00452-9

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Methods Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria Intercoder Agreemen...1

Citation Types

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Year Published

2024

Publication Types

Select...

Article3

Relationship

Self Cite0

Independent3

Authors

Journals

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, the terminal link must have included at least one condition with a contingency involving intervention for socially significant behavior, thus excluding translational studies. For example, Gifford et al (2022) was excluded from the review because the researchers used a concurrent-chains arrangement to show that choice could be shifted by pairing conditions with higher quality stimuli. The initial search yielded 355 articles across all journals.…”

Section: Methods Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria Intercoder Agreemen...mentioning

confidence: 99%

A review of the concurrent‐chains arrangement to assess intervention choice: 2018–2023

Auten,

Van Camp,

Ferguson

2024

J of App Behav Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Methods Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria Intercoder Agreemen...mentioning

confidence: 99%

A review of the concurrent‐chains arrangement to assess intervention choice: 2018–2023

Auten,

Van Camp,

Ferguson

2024

J of App Behav Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Choice versus no choice: Practical considerations for increasing choices

Kim,

Morris,

Ellsworth

et al. 2024

J of App Behav Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Choice involves engaging in a selection response when multiple options are concurrently available. Choices can be incorporated into many components of behavior‐analytic treatment such as providing clients with a choice between multiple items, activities, or tasks. We reviewed the main characteristics of 38 behavior‐analytic articles that compared choice and no‐choice conditions. We coded the experimental arrangements of choice and no‐choice conditions and analyzed potential factors affecting preferences for choice and no choice. The findings suggest that the sizing of alternatives from which to choose, the timing of choice opportunities, and the timing of the delivery of the chosen option varied across the studies. Furthermore, preferences for choice shifted with differential reinforcement history and response effort manipulations of choice or no choice. The findings suggest that individual variables should be considered when providing choices, but more research is needed.

show abstract