Skip to main content
Log in

Using Eye Gaze Preference Assessments to Identify Preferred Stimuli: A Systematic Review

  • Review
  • Published:
Education and Treatment of Children Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this review is to identify the application of eye-gaze stimulus preference assessment as well as the various characteristics of those assessments in the research literature. We conducted a systematic review that identified 18 articles using eye gaze to identify preferred stimuli. Of those studies, seven were used to determine a preference between biological and geometric motion, six were used to identify differences in social versus nonsocial stimuli, four looked at identifying preferred tangible items as potential reinforcers, and one looked at identifying preference for circumscribed interests related objects in children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Implications for future research are also presented.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

References marked with an asterisk indicate studies included in review.

  • *Annaz, D., Campbell, R., Coleman, M., Milne, E., & Swettenham, J. (2012). Young children with autism spectrum disorder do not preferentially attend to biological motion. Journal of Autism & Developmental Disorders, 42, 401–408. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-011-1256-3

  • Beukelman, D., & Light, J. (2020). Augmentative and alternative communication. Brookes.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Buhrow, M., & Bradley-Johnson, S. (2003). Preferences of students with profound mental retardation and healthy, full-term infants. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 24, 83–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0891-4222(03)00011-8

  • *Byrum, H. A. (2014). Evaluating the effects of reinforcer quality on academic skill acquisition with students with significant disabilities [Master’s thesis, Ohio State University]. OhioLINK. https://etd.ohiolink.edu/apexprod/rws_etd/send_file/send?accession=osu1406309104&disposition=inline

  • *Cannella-Malone, H., Sabielny, L., & Tullis, C. (2015). Using eye gaze to identify reinforcers for individuals with severe multiple disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 48, 680–684. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.231

  • Chita-Tegmark, M. (2016). Social attention in ASD: A review and meta-analysis of eye-tracking studies. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 48, 79–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2015.10.011

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Conyers, C., Doole, A., Vause, T., Harapiak, S., Yu, D. C., & Martin, G. L. (2002). Predicting the relative efficacy of three presentation methods for assessing preferences of persons with developmental disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 35, 49–58. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2002.35-49

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, J. O., Heron, T. E., & Heward, W. L. (2020). Applied behavior analysis (3rd ed.). Pearson/Merrill-Prentice Hall.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, W., Piazza, C., Bowman, L., Hagopian, L., Owens, J., & Slevin, I. (1992). A comparison of two approaches for identifying reinforcers for persons with severe and profound disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25(2), 491–498. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1992.25-491

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, W. W., Piazza, C. C., & Bowman, L. G. (1996). Integrating caregiver report with a systematic choice assessment to enhance reinforcer identification. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 101(1), 15–25.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • *Fleming, C., Wheeler, G., Cannella-Malone, H., Basbagill, A., Chung, Y., & Day, K. (2010). An evaluation of the use of eye gaze to measure preference of individuals with severe physical and developmental disabilities. Developmental Neurorehabilitation, 13(4), 266–275. https://doi.org/10.3109/17518421003705706

  • *Franchini, M., de Wilde, H., Glaser, B., Gentaz, E., Eliez, S., & Schaer, M. (2016). Brief Report: A preference for biological motion predicts a reduction in symptom severity 1 year later in preschoolers with autism spectrum disorders. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 7(143), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2016.00143

  • Gage, N. A., Cook, B. G., & Reichow, B. (2017). Publication bias in special education meta-analyses. Exceptional Children, 83(4), 428–445. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402917691016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graff, R. B., & Karsten, A. M. (2012). Assessing preferences of individuals with developmental disabilities: A survey of current practices. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 5, 37–48. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03391822

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Green, C. W., Reid, D. H., Canipe, V. S., & Gardner, S. M. (1991). A comprehensive evaluation of reinforcer identification processes for persons with profound multiple handicaps. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 24(3), 537–552.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Guillory, S., Baskett, V., Grosman, H., McLaughlin, C., Isenstein, E., Wilkinson, E., Weissman, J., Britvan, B., Trelles, M., Halpern, D., Buxbaum, J., Siper, P., Wang, A., Kolevzon, A., & Foss-Feig, J. (2020, February 20). Social visual attentional engagement and memory in Phelan-McDermid syndrome and autism spectrum disorder: An eye-tracking study. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/42d3f

  • Heinicke, M. R., Carr, J. E., & Copsey, C. J. (2019). Assessing preferences of individuals with developmental disabilities using alternative stimulus modalities: A systematic review. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 52, 847–869. https://doi.org/10.1002/jaba.565

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • *Hong, M., Guilfoyle, J., Mooney, L., Wink, L., Pedapati, E., Shaffer, R., Sweeney, J., & Erickson, C. (2017). Eye gaze and pupillary response in Angelman syndrome. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 68, 88–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2017.06.011

  • Ivancic, M. T., & Bailey, J. S. (1996). Current limits to reinforcer identification for some persons with profound multiple disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 17(1), 77–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karsten, A. M., Carr, J. E., & Lepper, T. L. (2011). Description of a practitioner model for identifying preferred stimuli with individuals with autism spectrum disorders. Behavior Modification, 35(4), 347–369. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145445511405184

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • *Klin, A., Lin, D., Gorrindo, P., Ramsay, G., & Jones, W. (2009). Two-year-olds with autism orient to nonsocial contingencies rather than biological motion. Nature, 459(7244), 257–261. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature07868

  • Ledford, J., Lane, J. D., & Barton, E. E. (2019). Methods of teaching in early education. Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Logan, K., & Gast, D. (2001). Conducting preference assessments and reinforcer testing for individuals with profound multiple disabilities: Issues and procedures. Exceptionality, 9, 123–134. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327035EX0903_3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Institute on Deafness & Other Communication Disorders. (2017, October 31). Apraxia of speech. National Institutes of Health. https://www.nidcd.nih.gov/health/apraxia-speech

  • *Navab, A. (2016, September) The use of eye-tracking as an assessment measure for social attention in autism spectrum disorder [Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Santa Barbara]. eScholarship. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/9k9828gd

  • Pace, G. M., Ivancic, M. T., Edwards, G. L., Iwata, B. A., & Page, T. J. (1985). Assessment of stimulus preference and reinforcer value with profoundly retarded individuals. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 18(3), 249–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., et al. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. International Journal of Surgery, 88, 105906.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Pierce, K., Conant, D., Hazin, R., Stoner, R., & Desmond, J. (2011). Preference for geometric patterns early in life as a risk factor for autism. Archives of General Psychiatry, 68(1), 101–109.

  • *Pierce, K., Marinero, S., Hazin, R., McKenna, B., Barnes, C., & Malige, A. (2016). Eye-tracking reveals abnormal visual preference for geometric images as an early biomarker of an ASD subtype associated with increased symptom severity. Biological Psychiatry, 79(8), 657–666. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsych.2015.03.032

  • Reid, D. H., Phillips, J. F., & Green, C. W. (1991). Teaching persons with profound multiple handicaps: A review of the effects of behavioral research. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 24(2), 319–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Resetar, J. L., & Noell, G. H. (2008). Evaluating preference assessments for use in the general education population. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 41(3), 447–451. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2008.41-447

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Rush, K. S., Mortenson, B. P., & Birch, S. E. (2010). Evaluation of preference assessment procedures for use with infants and toddlers. International Journal of Behavioral Consultation & Therapy, 6(1), 2–16. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0100893

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sargent, J., Clarke, M., Price, K., Griffiths, T., & Swettenham, J. (2013). Use of eye‐pointing by children with cerebral palsy: what are we looking at? International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 48(5), 477–485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Sasson, N., & Touchstone, E. (2014). Visual attention to competing social and object images by preschool children with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism & Developmental Disorders, 44, 584–592. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-013-1910-z

  • *Shaffer, R., Pedapati, E., Shic, F., Gaietto, K., Bowers, K., Wink, L., & Erickson, C. (2017). Brief report: Diminished gaze preference for dynamic social interaction scenes in youth with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism & Developmental Disorders, 47, 506–513. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-016-2975-2

  • *Shi, L., Zhou, Y., Ou, J., Gong, J., Wang, S., Cui, X., Lyu, H., Zhao, J., & Luo, X. (2015). Different visual preference patterns in response to simple and complex dynamic social stimuli in preschool-aged children with autism spectrum disorders. PloS One, 10(3), e0122280. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0122280

  • Sidman, M. (2000). Equivalence relations and the reinforcement contingency. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 74(1), 127–146. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.2000.74-127

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Spevack, S., Wright, L., Yu, C. T., Walters, K. L., & Holborn, S. (2008). Passive and active approach responses in preference assessment for children with profound multiple disabilities and minimal movement. Journal on Developmental Disabilities = Le journal sur les handicaps du development, 14, 61–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tiger, J. H., & Kliebert, M. L. (2011). Stimulus preference assessment. In J. K. Luiselli (Ed.), Teaching and behavior support for children and adults with autism spectrum disorder: A practitioner's guide (pp. 30–37). Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tobii. (2021). https://www.tobii.com/group/about/this-is-eye-tracking/

  • Tullis, C. A., Cannella-Malone, H. I., Basbigill, A. R., Yeager, A., Fleming, C. V., Payne, D., & Wu, P. F. (2011). Review of the choice and preference assessment literature for individuals with severe to profound disabilities. Education & Training in Autism & Developmental Disabilities, 46, 576–595.

    Google Scholar 

  • Virués-Ortega, J., Pritchard, K., Grant, R. L., North, S., Hurtado-Parrado, C., Lee, M. S., Temple, B., Julio, F., & Yu, C. T. (2014). Clinical decision making and preference assessment for individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities. American Journal on Intellectual & Developmental Disabilities, 119(2), 151–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, S., Buchanan, J. A., Bailey, J., Andresen, F. J., & Omlie, C. (2020). The use of stimulus preference assessments for persons with neurocognitive disorder: A literature review. Clinical Gerontologist, 43(3), 243–255 https://doi.org/10.1080/07317115.2019.1670313

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • *Wang, Q., Hu, Y., Zhang, Y., Zou, X., Li, S., Fang, F., & Yi, L. (2018). Children with autism spectrum disorder prefer looking at repetitive movements in a preferential looking paradigm. Journal of Autism & Developmental Disorders, 48, 2821–2831. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-018-3546-5

  • *Wheeler, G. M. (2009). An evaluation of the use of eye gaze to measure preference for individuals with multiple disabilities [Master’s thesis, Ohio State University]. OhioLINK. https://etd.ohiolink.edu/apexprod/rws_etd/send_file/send?accession=osu1250703534&disposition=inline

  • *Wilson, C., Brock, J., & Palermo, R. (2010). Attention to social stimuli and facial identity recognition skills in autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 54(12), 1004–1115. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2788.2010.01340.x

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Benjamin S. Riden.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Riden, B.S., Snyder, S.M., Fowkes, C.L. et al. Using Eye Gaze Preference Assessments to Identify Preferred Stimuli: A Systematic Review. Educ. Treat. Child. 45, 305–320 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43494-022-00076-4

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43494-022-00076-4

Keywords

Navigation