Preference Assessment vs Values Assessment in ABA

A preference assessment and a values assessment, on close inspection, it kind of isn't different. Take Roberto. A standard preference assessment says he likes books, dangling things, lining up objects, and cheese. He hates sitting still, loud noises, being told no, and transitions. A values assessment looks at the same list and asks a second question. What does that list want? Visual stimulation. Organization. Free access to movement. Order. Autonomy. Predictability. Same data. Different question. Different treatment plan.

The Short Answer (and Why It Is Not Really Two Tools)#

A Board Certified Behavior Analyst (BCBA) hears this question on day one of a new case. Is a values assessment a different thing from a preference assessment? The honest answer is no, and yes. The technology is the same. You watch what the learner moves toward, what they move away from, and what they keep coming back to. A Multiple Stimulus Without Replacement (MSWO) gives you a ranked list. A reinforcer survey gives you parent and teacher report. Those tools do not change.

What changes is the question you bring to the data. A preference assessment asks, what will keep this learner working in the next session. A values assessment asks, what does this learner's life look like when it is going well. Same observations. Wider lens.

That second question is what Brian Middleton is pushing the field to add. Not a new form. A second pass.

How is the difference from reinforcement survey, this different from reinforcer survey and preference assessment? Great question. It kind of isn't. We have the technology. We've had this for a very long time. Brian Middleton, from the talk

Same Data, Different Question: From Cheese to Order#

Here is what the two-pass read looks like in practice. The team runs a paired-stimulus preference assessment with Roberto. They also ask his mom and his teacher what he loves and what he hates.

Likes: flipping through books, dangling things, lining up objects, cheese.

Hates: sitting still except with books, loud noises, being told no, bathroom, transitions, sharing.

A preference-only read stops there. The plan loads cheese into the reinforcement bank, schedules book breaks, and calls it done.

A values pass keeps going. What is the pattern under the likes? Books and lining up objects look like a search for order and visual structure. Dangling things and free movement look like a need for autonomy and sensory regulation. What is the pattern under the hates? Loud noises, transitions, and being told no all share one thing. They take away predictability.

Now the team has a candidate values list. Visual stimulation. Order. Movement. Autonomy. Predictability. Exploration. That list shapes a different plan. Reinforcement still uses cheese. But the schedule, the visuals, and the choice points are built around the values, not the snacks.

The Dead Man Test (What a Value Has to Survive)#

The dead man test is the old behavior-analytic rule. If a dead person can do it, it is not behavior. Quiet, still, not crying, not asking. A dead person can do all of those. So those are not behaviors. They are the absence of behavior.

The same test applies to values. A value is not "stop having meltdowns." A value is not "tolerate transitions." A dead person tolerates transitions just fine. Those are avoidance goals dressed up in values language.

A value has to be something the learner moves toward. Something you can see. Something a camera could film. Building a Lego city is a value-expressing behavior. Lining up the markers by color is a value-expressing behavior. Picking the loud snack at lunch is a value-expressing behavior.

This matters because it forces the plan to write goals in terms of what the learner will do more of, not what staff will see less of.

Values. I'm going to go over what values are not and what values are. First, values are not goals. Values are not avoidance. Values are not people or things. But here's what values are. They are very observable. Values can be, we can tact them. Values must pass the dead man test. Period. Brian Middleton, from the talk

When a Preference Assessment Alone Fails: Stimulus Masking#

A preference assessment can hand the team a powerful reinforcer that traps the learner. The technical name is stimulus masking. The everyday name is doomscrolling at 1 a.m. when you have to be up at 6.

If you have ever caught yourself swiping past the time you wanted to sleep, you have lived through what a high-rate, low-value reinforcer feels like. The phone wins. The thing you actually care about, sleep, time with the person next to you, getting to the gym, loses. The reinforcement is real. The cost is real. Both can be true.

The same thing happens in a session. A learner picks the iPad every single time. The team logs it as the top preference and builds the plan around it. Six months later the learner has the same three apps, the same three behaviors, and zero new skills. The reinforcer was so strong it masked everything else. The team never saw the learner reach for a book, a peer, or a new activity, because the iPad was always there first.

A values pass catches this. If the value is exploration, the iPad alone is not enough. If the value is connection, the iPad alone is the opposite. The team still uses the iPad. They just stop pretending it is the whole plan.

Because we know that a reinforcer can be so powerful that it can interfere with access for things the individual needs. Just because it's reinforcing doesn't mean we should do it. Brian Middleton, from the talk

A Side-by-Side Table for the Next Team Meeting#

Here is a clean comparison the team can pull up in a meeting.

The table is not a choice between two columns. It is a reminder to fill out both before the plan goes to the family.

When to Run Each One in a New Case#

For a new case, the order is fixed. Preference assessment first. Values pass second. Same week if possible.

Run the preference assessment in the first session or two. You need a reinforcer list to teach anything at all. Use MSWO or paired-stimulus, depending on the learner's response style. Pair it with a caregiver survey.

Run the values pass before the first treatment plan meeting. Pull out the likes list and the hates list. Add free-time observations. Ask the family one open-ended question. What does a good Saturday look like for your kid. Then write the candidate values list.

For a re-authorization or a plan rewrite, run the values pass first. The reinforcer list is probably still fine. What the team needs is a fresh look at where the learner is heading.

For a learner whose program has stalled, run both. A stall is almost always a sign that the reinforcer is masking something the values pass would catch.

What to Put in the Treatment Plan So Both Show Up#

The treatment plan should show both passes on paper. If only the preference assessment appears, the next clinician will assume the values work was skipped.

Three pieces do the job.

First, a reinforcer section. List the top items and activities from the preference assessment. Include the date and the method.

Second, a values section. List three to six candidate values in plain words. Write one sentence under each that names a behavior the learner already does that expresses that value. This is the dead man test, applied in writing.

Third, a goal section that maps to both. Each goal should name the value it serves and the reinforcer that will be used during teaching. A goal that names only the reinforcer is a preference-only goal. A goal that names only the value is a vague goal. Both lines, every time.

When the plan is built this way, a new BCBA picking up the case can see the whole story in 10 minutes. So can a parent.

Frequently asked questions#

Is a values assessment required by the BACB?

Not as a separate, named procedure. The BACB Ethics Code does require behavior analysts to act in the learner's best interest and to involve the client and family in goal selection. A values pass is one of the cleanest ways to document that you did both. It is good practice, and it makes audits easier, even if it is not on a checklist.

Do I need to stop doing preference assessments if I add a values assessment?

No. The preference assessment is the foundation. You still need a ranked reinforcer list to teach anything new. The values pass sits on top of the preference data and asks a second question. Drop the preference assessment and you lose the reinforcement plan.

Can a preference assessment cause harm?

Yes, if it is used alone for too long. A very strong reinforcer can mask access to things the learner actually needs, like new skills, peers, or rest. That is stimulus masking. The fix is not to stop running preference assessments. The fix is to add the values pass so the team sees the whole picture.

Watch the full talk#

Brian Middleton walks through the dead man test, the Roberto worked example, and several other cases where the values pass changes the plan. If you write treatment plans or run intake assessments, this is the talk to watch before your next case opens.