Assessing preferences of individuals with acquired brain injury using alternative stimulus modalities

References

• Cope DN. The effectiveness of traumatic brain injury rehabilitation: A review. Brain Injury 1995; 9: 649–670
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hall KM, Cope DN. The benefit of rehabilitation in traumatic brain injury: A literature review. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation 1995; 10: 1–13
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Page T. Understanding and treating functional impacts of brain injury. The essential brain injury guide4th, T Antoinette, D Braunling-McMorrow, M Lash, L Reyst, H Tyler. Brain Injury Association of America, Vienna, VA 2006; 81–105
   Google Scholar
• Granger CV, Markello SJ, Graham JE, Deutsch A, Reistetter TA, Ottenbacher KJ. The uniform data system for medical rehabilitation: Report of patients with traumatic brain injury discharged from rehabilitation programs in 2000–2007. American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2010; 89: 265–278
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kreutzer JS, Kolakowsky-Hayner SA, Ripley D, Cifu DX, Rosenthal M, Bushnik T, Zafonte R, Englander J, High W. Charges and lengths of stay for acute and inpatient rehabilitation treatment of traumatic brain injury: 1990-1996. Brain Injury 2001; 15: 763–774
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braunling-McMorrow AD, Lash M, Reyst L, Tyler H, The essential brain injury guide. 4th ed. Vienna, VA: Brain Injury Association of America; 2006
   Google Scholar
• Jacobs HE. Behavior analysis guidelines and brain injury rehabilitation: People, principles: Programs. Aspen Publishers, Gaithersburg, MD 1993
   Google Scholar
• Katzmann S, Mix C. Improving functional independence in a patient with encephalitis through behavior modification shaping techniques. American Journal of Occupational Therapy 1994; 48: 259–262
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cowley BJ, Green G, Braunling-McMorrow D. Using stimulus equivalence procedures to teach name-face matching to adults with brain injuries. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 1992; 25: 461–475
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thompson CD, Born DG. Increasing correct participation in an exercise class for adult day care clients. Behavioral Interventions 1990; 14: 171–186
   Google Scholar
• O’Reilly MF, Green G, Braunling-McMorrow D. Self-administered written prompts to teach home accident prevention skills to adults with brain injuries. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 1990; 23: 431–446
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heinicke MR, Carr JE, Mozzoni MP. Using differential reinforcement to decrease academic response latencies of an adolescent with acquired brain injury. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 2009; 42: 861–865
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dixon MR, Horner MJ, Guercio J. Self-control and the preference for delayed reinforcement: An example in brain injury. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 2003; 36: 371–374
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pace GM, Ivancic MT, Edwards GL, Iwata BA, Page TJ. Assessment of stimulus preference and reinforcer value with profoundly retarded individuals. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 1985; 18: 249–255
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fisher WW, Piazza CC, Bowman LG, Hagopian LP, Owens JC, Slevin I. A comparison of two approaches for identifying reinforcers for persons with severe and profound disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 1992; 25: 491–498
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeLeon IG, Iwata BA. Evaluation of a multiple-stimulus presentation format for assessing reinforcer preferences. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 1996; 29: 519–533
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cote AA, Thompson RH, Hanley GP, McKerchar PM. Teacher report and direct assessment of preferences for identifying reinforcers for young children. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 2007; 40: 157–166
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Green CW, Reid DH, White LK, Halford RC, Brittain DP, Gardner SM. Identifying reinforcers for persons with profound handicaps: Staff opinion versus systematic assessment of preferences. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 1988; 21: 31–43
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Northup J. Further evaluation of the accuracy of reinforcer surveys: A systematic replication. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 2000; 33: 335–338
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clevenger TM, Graff RB. Assessing object-to-picture and picture-to-object matching as prerequisite skills for pictorial preference assessments. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 2005; 38: 543–547
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen-Almeida D, Graff RB, Ahearn WH. A comparison of verbal and tangible stimulus preference assessments. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 2000; 33: 329–334
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Conyers C, Doole A, Vause T, Harapiak S, Yu CT, Martin GL. Predicting the relative efficacy of three presentation methods for assessing preferences of persons with developmental disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 2002; 35: 49–58
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwartzman L, Yu CT, Martin GL. Choice responding as a function of choice presentation method and level of preference in persons with developmental disabilities. International Journal of Disability, Community, and Rehabilitation 2003; 1: 1–7
   Google Scholar
• deVries C, Yu CT, Sakko G, Wirth KM, Walters KL, Marion C, Martin GL. Predicting the relative efficacy of verbal, pictorial, and tangible stimuli for assessing preferences for leisure activities. American Journal of Mental Retardation 2005; 110: 145–154
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Reyer HS, Sturmey P. The assessment of basic learning abilities (ABLA) test predicts the relative efficacy of task preferences for persons with developmental disabilities. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research 2006; 50: 404–409
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fisher WW, Piazza CC, Bowman LG, Amari A. Integrating caregiver report with a systematic choice assessment to enhance reinforcer identification. American Journal of Mental Retardation 1996; 101: 15–25
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kerr N, Meyerson L, Flora J. The measurement of motor, visual and auditory discrimination skills. Rehabilitation Psychology 1977; 24: 95–112
   Google Scholar
• Vause T, Yu CT, Martin GL. The assessment of basic learning abilities test for persons with intellectual disability: A valuable clinical tool. Journal of Applied Research in Intellect 2007; 20: 483–489
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roane HS, Lerman DC, Vorndran CM. Assessing reinforcers under progressive schedule requirements. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 2001; 34: 145–167
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barlow DH, Hayes SC. Alternating treatments design: One strategy for comparing the effects of two treatments in a single subject. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 1979; 12: 199–210
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glover AC, Roane HS, Kadey HJ, Grow LL. Preference for reinforcers under progressive- and fixed-ratio schedules: A comparison of single and concurrent arrangements. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 2008; 41: 163–176
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooper JO, Heron TE, Heward WL. Applied behavior analysis2nd. Pearson/Merrill-Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ 2007
   Google Scholar
• Roscoe EM, Fisher WW. Evaluation of an efficient method for training staff to implement stimulus preference assessments. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 2008; 41: 249–254
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carr JE, Nicolson AC, Higbee TS. Evaluation of a brief multiple-stimulus preference assessment in a naturalistic context. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 2000; 33: 353–357
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanley GP, Iwata BA, Roscoe EM. Some determinants of changes in preference over time. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 2006; 39: 189–202
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tasky KM, Rudrud EH, Schulze KA, Rapp JT. Using choice to increase on-task behavior in individuals with traumatic brain injury. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 2008; 41: 261–265
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kennedy CH. Manipulating antecedent conditions to alter the stimulus control of problem behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 1994; 27: 161–170
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feeney TF, Ylvisaker M. Context-sensitive behavioral supports for young children with TBI: Short-term effects and long-term outcome. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation 2003; 18: 33–52
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin GL, Thorsteinsson JR, Yu CT, Martin TL, Vause T. The Assessment of Basic Learning Abilities test for predicting learning of persons with intellectual disabilities: A review. Behavior Modification 2008; 32: 228–247
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar