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 CO Negative Positive Positive CO Positive Positive Sigafoos, Green, Payne, Son, O’Reilly, & Lancioni. (2009). 1 15 AT Speech generating A comparison of picture exchange and speech-generating devices: AT device/picture exchange Acquisition, preference and effects on social interaction. Reversal (PE) Sigafoos, O’Reilly, Ganz, Lancioni, & Schlosser. (2005). 2 12–13 MB VOCA 3 Supporting self-determination in AAC interventions by assessing VOCA/PE preference for communication devices. Son, Sigafoos, O’Reilly, & Lancioni. (2006). 3 3–4 AT VOCA/PE CO Positive Comparing two types of augmentative and alternative communication systems for children with autism. Spevak, Martin, Hiebert, Yu, & Martin. (2005). 4 23–45 AT Work tasks N/A Negative Effects of choice of work tasks on on-task, aberrant, happiness, and unhappiness behaviors of persons with developmental disabilities. Tasky, Rudrud, Schulze, & Rapp. (2008). 3 21–42 Reversal Work tasks N/A Positive Using choice to increase on-task behavior in individuals with traumatic brain injury. Teaching Individuals to Make Choices and Training Staff to Provide Choice Opportunities Clevenger & Graff. (2005). 6 9–16 Reversal Edible items/pictures PC Mixed Assessing object-to-picture and picture-to-object matching as prerequisite skills for pictorial preference assessments. Positive Positive Leisure items PC CO 3 N/A N/A CC Machalicek, O’Reilly, Chan, Rispoli, Lang, Davis, Shogren, Sorrells, Lancioni, Sigafoos, Green, & Langthorne. (2009). Using videoconferencing to support teachers to conduct preference assessments with students with autism and developmental disabilities. (Participants were undergraduate pre-service teachers) Review of Choice and Preference Assessment / 583
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 Positive Reid, Green, & Parsons. (2003). 2 N/A MP N/A Q, PC 4 An outcome management program for extending advances in choice research into choice opportunities for supported workers with severe multiple disabilities. (Participants were job coaches) Roscoe & Fisher. (2008). N/A ME N/A MSWO/PC 4 Positive Evaluation of an efficient method for training staff to implement stimulus 8 preference assessments.(Participants were clinic trainees) Positive Roscoe, Fisher, Glover, & Volkert. (2006). 4 N/A MB w/ AT N/A MSWO/PC 4 Evaluating the relative effects of feedback and contingent money for staff training of stimulus preference assessments. (Participants were clinic trainees) 1 ME: multi-element; AT: alternating treatments; CC: concurrent chains; MB: multiple baseline; MP: multiple probe. 2 For studies with multiple experiments, each experiment is presented separately as indicated by a split cell. 3 Voice output communication aid. 4 The choice formats presented represent the assessment methodologies on which the staff participants were trained in these training studies. 584 / Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities-December 2011
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:
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:
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 69 and 70: Education and Training in Autism an
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 and 104: TABLE 1 Studies Listed According to
Page 105 and 106: TABLE 1—(Continued) Studies Liste
Page 107: 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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?