Comparing Simultaneous and Sequential Food Presentation to Increase Consumption of Novel Target Foods.

Morgan Davis, Jessica Slaton, Jacquelyn MacDonald, Diana Parry-Cruwys
Author Information
  1. Morgan Davis: Regis College, Weston, MA USA.
  2. Jessica Slaton: Nashoba Learning Group, 10 Oak Park Drive, Bedford, MA 01730 USA.
  3. Jacquelyn MacDonald: Regis College, Weston, MA USA.
  4. Diana Parry-Cruwys: Regis College, Weston, MA USA.

Abstract

Two methods of food presentation (simultaneous and sequential) were compared in an adapted alternating treatment design to determine effects on consumption of target foods for three children with autism in a school setting. Preferred and nonpreferred target foods were nominated by parents, and consumption of reported preferred and nonpreferred foods was directly tested. Preferred and nonpreferred foods were then paired together and assigned to one of two conditions. In the simultaneous condition, bites of preferred and nonpreferred food were presented at the same time, with the nonpreferred food placed behind or inside the preferred food. In the sequential condition, a bite of preferred food was delivered contingent on consumption of a bite of nonpreferred food. Consumption increased in the sequential condition for two out of three participants. Implications for treatment of food selectivity in a school setting are discussed.This study describes two simple interventions to increase consumption of nonpreferred foods that can be implemented in a classroom settingThese data contribute to previous studies comparing sequential versus simultaneous presentation of foods by conducting the procedures in participants' natural settingResults indicate the efficacy of sequential presentation of preferred and nonpreferred foods without the use of escape extinctionResults also suggest further research comparing sequential versus simultaneous food presentation is warranted, given the few direct comparisons that currently exist and their overall mixed results regarding relative efficacy.

Keywords

References

  1. J Appl Behav Anal. 2002 Winter;35(4):363-74 [PMID: 12555908]
  2. Autism Res Treat. 2011;2011:541926 [PMID: 22937249]
  3. J Autism Dev Disord. 2011 Oct;41(10):1303-20 [PMID: 21161577]
  4. J Am Diet Assoc. 2010 Feb;110(2):238-46 [PMID: 20102851]
  5. J Appl Behav Anal. 2002 Fall;35(3):259-70 [PMID: 12365739]
  6. Anal Verbal Behav. 2019 Nov 19;36(1):102-114 [PMID: 32699741]
  7. Pediatrics. 2012 Nov;130 Suppl 2:S145-53 [PMID: 23118245]
  8. J Appl Behav Anal. 1992 Summer;25(2):491-8 [PMID: 1634435]
  9. Behav Anal Pract. 2018 Sep 17;12(2):301-309 [PMID: 31976235]
  10. J Autism Dev Disord. 2012 Aug;42(8):1574-81 [PMID: 22042309]
  11. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2014 Dec;114(12):1981-7 [PMID: 24928779]
  12. J Appl Behav Anal. 2012 Fall;45(3):527-37 [PMID: 23060666]
  13. J Appl Behav Anal. 2005 Fall;38(3):405-9 [PMID: 16270850]
  14. J Appl Behav Anal. 1996 Summer;29(2):243-6 [PMID: 8682740]
  15. Clin Pediatr (Phila). 2010 Mar;49(3):217-20 [PMID: 19483138]
  16. J Pediatr. 2010 Aug;157(2):259-64 [PMID: 20362301]
  17. J Appl Behav Anal. 2019 Oct;52(4):1161-1175 [PMID: 31523816]
  18. J Appl Behav Anal. 2020 Apr;53(2):918-937 [PMID: 32141096]
  19. J Appl Behav Anal. 2003 Fall;36(3):361-5 [PMID: 14596577]
  20. Behav Anal Pract. 2015 Aug 5;8(2):233-240 [PMID: 27703925]
  21. J Appl Behav Anal. 2020 Sep;53(4):2002-2023 [PMID: 32342518]
  22. J Appl Behav Anal. 2003 Fall;36(3):309-24 [PMID: 14596572]
  23. J Appl Behav Anal. 2016 Sep;49(3):485-511 [PMID: 27449267]
  24. Pediatr Neurol. 2019 May;94:61-63 [PMID: 30795887]
  25. Dev Disabil Res Rev. 2008;14(2):174-81 [PMID: 18646017]
  26. J Autism Dev Disord. 2017 Feb;47(2):439-446 [PMID: 27866350]
  27. J Appl Behav Anal. 2002 Spring;35(1):65-8 [PMID: 11936547]
  28. J Appl Behav Anal. 2021 Jan;54(1):144-167 [PMID: 33034386]
  29. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2003 Jul;37(1):75-84 [PMID: 12827010]
  30. Pediatr Rep. 2013 Jun 13;5(2):38-42 [PMID: 23904965]
  31. J Appl Behav Anal. 2021 Jan;54(1):287-308 [PMID: 32748439]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0foodnonpreferredfoodspresentationsequentialpreferredsimultaneousconsumptiontwoconditiontreatmenttargetthreeschoolsettingPreferredbiteConsumptionselectivitycomparingversusefficacySimultaneousSequentialFoodTwomethodscomparedadaptedalternatingdesigndetermineeffectschildrenautismnominatedparentsreporteddirectlytestedpairedtogetherassignedoneconditionsbitespresentedtimeplacedbehindinsidedeliveredcontingentincreasedparticipantsImplicationsdiscussedThisstudydescribessimpleinterventionsincreasecanimplementedclassroomsettingThesedatacontributepreviousstudiesconductingproceduresparticipants'naturalsettingResultsindicatewithoutuseescapeextinctionResultsalsosuggestresearchwarrantedgivendirectcomparisonscurrentlyexistoverallmixedresultsregardingrelativeComparingPresentationIncreaseNovelTargetFoodsAutismNonextinction

Similar Articles

Cited By