Abstract
Two studies were conducted that examined the preference of a student diagnosed with a brain injury. In Study 1, a preference assessment was followed by a three-choice concurrent-operants reinforcer assessment. Two choices resulted in access to preferred activities for completing work, and a third choice resulted in access to nothing (i.e., no activity). Unpredictably, the participant consistently chose the no-activity option. Study 2 examined why this student preferred work associated with no activity over preferred activities. Through a variety of concurrent-operants procedures, it was determined that she preferred fluent work followed by reinforcers rather than work that was broken up by access to preferred activities. Implications for research on preference are discussed.