etadd_46(4) - Division on Autism and Developmental Disabilities

More documents

Recommendations

Info

TABLE 1 —(Continued) Studies Listed According to Categories with Number and Age of Participants (only those with a severe to profound disability), Experimental Design, Type of Stimuli Presented, Choice Format, and Results Stimuli Choice Format Results Category/Article Name n Age Design 12 Keen & Pennell. (2010). 4 4–5 Reversal Leisure activities FO Mixed Evaluating an engagement-based preference assessment for children with autism. N/A Positive Kreiner & Flexer. (2009). 29 16–22 N/A Pictures of leisure Assessment of leisure preferences for students with severe developmental activities disabilities and communication difficulties Lattimore, Parsons, & Reid. (2003). 5 26–38 N/A Work materials MSW Positive Assessing preferred work among adults with autism beginning supported jobs: Identification of constant and alternating preferences. Mechling & Moser. (2010). 1 11–13 N/A Video clips N/A Positive Video preference assessment of students with autism for watching self, adults, or peers. O’Reilly, Lancioni, & Sigafoos. (2004). 1 5 Reversal Activities/toys PC Positive Using paired-choice assessment to identify variables maintaining sleep problems in a child with severe disabilities. 10 32–52 AT Electronic devices CO Mixed Saunders, Saunders, Mulugeta, Henderson, Kedziorski, Hekker, & Wilson. (2005). A novel method for testing learning and preferences in people with minimal motor movement Smaby, MacDonald, Ahearn, & Dube. (2007). 3 4–7 N/A Social consequences SS post EXT Positive Assessment protocol for identifying preferred social consequences. Smith, Bihm, Tavkar, & Sturmey. (2005). 9 Adults N/A N/A FO Positive Approach-avoidance and happiness indicators in natural environments: a 4 7–9 N/A Staff members and tasks FO Positive preliminary analysis of the stimulus preference coding system Review of Choice and Preference Assessment / 579
TABLE 1—(Continued) Studies Listed According to Categories with Number and Age of Participants (only those with a severe to profound disability), Experimental Design, Type of Stimuli Presented, Choice Format, and Results Stimuli Choice Format Results Category/Article Name n Age Design 12 Spevack, Yu, Lee, & Martin. (2006). 2 8, 12 Reversal Sensoryactivities SS Positive Sensitivity of passive approach during preference and reinforcer assessments for children with severe and profound intellectual disabilities and minimal movement Olfactory stimuli PC Mixed Wilder, Schadler, Higbee, Haymes, Bajagic, & Register. (2008). 2 13–38 Reversal w/ Identification of olfactory stimuli as reinforcers in individuals with autism: ME A preliminary investigation. Preference Assessment Comparisons Graff & Gibson. (2003). 2 14–20 Reversal Edible items, pictures PC Positive Using pictures to assess reinforcers in individuals with developmental disabilities. Graff, Gibson, & Gallatsatos. (2006). 4 14–15 Reversal w/ AT Tangible items/pictures PC Positive The impact of high- and low-preference stimuli on vocational and academic performances of youths with severe disabilities. Groskreutz & Graff. (2009). 5 15–17 Reversal Edible items PC Positive Evaluating pictorial preference assessment: The effect of differential 4 15–17 Reversal w/ AT Edible items PC Mixed outcomes on preference assessment results. Horrocks & Morgan. (2009). 3 18–22 N/A Work materials PC vs. Positive Comparison of a video-based assessment and a multiple stimulus to identify MSWO preferred jobs for individuals with significant intellectual disabilities. 580 / Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities-December 2011 Kodak, Fisher, Kelley, & Kisamore. (2009). 4 3–10 Reversal Food/toys FO vs. MSW Mixed Comparing preference assessments: Selection- versus duration-based preference assessment procedures. Reed, Luiselli, Magnuson, Fillers, Vieira, & Rue. (2009). 1 19.5 AT Edible Items PC vs. Positive A comparison between traditional economical and demand curve analyses MSWO vs. of relative reinforcer efficacy in the validation of preference assessment FO predictions.
Page 1 and 2:
Education and Training in Autism an
Page 3 and 4:
March 2012 Manuscripts Accepted for
Page 5 and 6:
new line of research, the review ho
Page 7 and 8:
TABLE 1—(Continued) Overview of H
Page 9 and 10:
TABLE 1—(Continued) Overview of H
Page 11 and 12:
Figure 1. MP3 Player (Model: SM-320
Page 13 and 14:
Figure 3. Sony-Ericsson K800. Retri
Page 15 and 16:
computer with three middle school s
Page 17 and 18:
Figure 6. Video iPod. Apple, Inc. h
Page 19 and 20:
example, in contrast to previous st
Page 21 and 22:
using public transportation. Device
Page 23 and 24:
accessible software to increase ind
Page 25 and 26:
(14.3%), a unique curriculum (13.8%
Page 27 and 28:
TABLE 1 Student Characteristics Stu
Page 29 and 30:
eos” was highlighted. Students th
Page 31 and 32:
ment was 100% for baseline and main
Page 33 and 34:
Figure 3. Percentage of independent
Page 35 and 36:
how to program and operate the equi
Page 37 and 38:
Individuals with Disabilities Educa
Page 39 and 40:
Education and Training in Autism an
Page 41 and 42:
TABLE 1 Video Prompting Studies Con
Page 43 and 44:
TABLE 1—(Continued) Video Prompti
Page 45 and 46:
Length of video clips. Researchers
Page 47 and 48:
to learn three cooking tasks. Resul
Page 49 and 50:
Van Laarhoven and Van Laarhoven-Mye
Page 51 and 52:
Dogoe, M., & Banda, D. R. (2009). R
Page 53 and 54: Education and Training in Autism an
Page 55 and 56: TABLE 1 Summary of Demographic and
Page 57 and 58: TABLE 2 Summary of Outcome Variable
Page 59 and 60: with students in preschool (Akmanog
Page 61 and 62: with MoID acquiring some of their p
Page 63 and 64: Vocational task. To date one study
Page 65 and 66: ed; thereby adding to the amount of
Page 67 and 68: Retardation and Developmental Disab
Page 71 and 72: TABLE 1 Student Demographic Informa
Page 73 and 74: Figure 1. Example of the mini-poste
Page 75 and 76: Experimental Design This study empl
Page 77 and 78: intervention sessions was 75.55% de
Page 79 and 80: help continue maximum skill profici
Page 83 and 84: at the same time, or did not respon
Page 85 and 86: Figure 1. Correct responses for Joe
Page 87 and 88: sponses for each skill. No trends w
Page 89 and 90: then be used as a template for quic
Page 91 and 92: 2007). Choice making initiates the
Page 93 and 94: making choices is clearly not in th
Page 95 and 96: epeated until stable choice pattern
Page 97 and 98: transportation, commitment) to prov
Page 99 and 100: can be made. Last, because consumer
Page 103: TABLE 1 Studies Listed According to
Page 107 and 108: TABLE 1—(Continued) Studies Liste
Page 109 and 110: TABLE 1—(Continued) Studies Liste
Page 111 and 112: (i.e., MSW) and duration-based (i.e
Page 113 and 114: 2008), and increasing adaptive beha
Page 115 and 116: port difficulty implementing the in
Page 117 and 118: of a preferred item while continuin
Page 119 and 120: Kreiner, J., & Flexer, R. (2009). A
Page 123 and 124: autism on the CARS. Regarding socia
Page 125 and 126: other effect size measures and with
Page 127 and 128: quests during baseline sessions. Du
Page 129 and 130: ulation was generally clear and he
Page 131 and 132: communication training as a treatme
Page 133 and 134: encing allergy symptoms (one partic
Page 135 and 136: Assessments Preference assessment.
Page 137 and 138: Interobserver agreement. A second o
Page 139 and 140: challenging behavior in the presess
Page 141 and 142: tion of the preferred item signaled
Page 143 and 144: ior: An analysis of the literature.
Page 145 and 146: moderate intellectual disabilities
Page 147 and 148: Effects of the STAR intervention pr
Page 149 and 150: Copeland, S. R. (2002). See citatio
Page 151 and 152: 126. Ezell, D., & Klein, C. (2003).
Page 153 and 154: computer-based instruction program.
Page 155 and 156:
sight words to students with mental
Page 157 and 158:
Mastropieri, M. A. (2009). See cita
Page 159 and 160:
262. Noyes, D. A., & Sax, C. L. (20
Page 161 and 162:
Rispoli, M. (2009). See citation #1
Page 163 and 164:
Sparks, S. (2010). See citation #87
Page 165 and 166:
Vlaskamp, C. (2008). See citation #
Page 167 and 168:
INDEX—VOLUME 46,
Page 169 and 170:
Runes, Sandra. See Hausmann-Stabile
Page 171 and 172:
Review of video prompting studies w
Page 173 and 174:
Look! I'm in College! DVD Look, I
Page 175 and 176:
13th International Conference on Au
show all

etadd_46(4) - Division on Autism and Developmental Disabilities

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?