etadd_46(4) - Division on Autism and Developmental Disabilities

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Figure 2. Percentage of intervals with academic engagement. Effects of Presession Satiation / 615
tion of the preferred item signaled a reduction in that item’s reinforcing value and functioned as a behavioral indicator of satiation. This presession access may have also contributed to the increase in academic engagement in the subsequent classroom session. By decreasing each child’s motivation to engage in challenging behavior, the child may have allocated his behavior towards accessing reinforcement derived from academic engagement. With the decrease in the reinforcing value of the tangible item, the participants may have had more opportunity to seek out and access novel communities of reinforcement. Interactions with the classmates, the teacher, or instructional materials may have become more reinforcing relative to the tangible item following presession satiation. Additionally, most of the participants’ topographies of challenging behavior conflicted with academic engagement. For instance elopement and aggression are incompatible with academic engagement. Thus, by reducing the frequency of challenging behavior there may have been an increase in opportunities for academic engagement. The reductions in challenging behavior in the classroom following the presession satiation condition suggest that the MO was successfully isolated and manipulated. In all classroom conditions tangibly maintained challenging behavior was placed on extinction such that the participants were never given access to the tangible items. By holding consequences constant across the two conditions, the only manipulation was presession access to the tangible item. Furthermore, classroom activities were held constant for each participant thereby reducing the influence of possible extraneous variables such as task preference, on levels of challenging behavior. While presession satiation may explain the reduction in challenging behavior, other variables may have also contributed to the effectiveness of this intervention. For example, the effectiveness of the presession satiation condition on reducing challenging behavior may have been enhanced by the consideration of functional analysis results. Previous research has shown that MO interventions may not be effective when they are not matched to the function of challenging behavior (McComas et al., 2003). In light of this, each participant’s challenging behavior was first assessed using analogue functional analyses. The presession satiation condition was then carefully designed to reflect the tangible function of the participants’ challenging behavior. Furthermore, the tangible item used was confirmed by the results of a paired choice preference assessment and presession access was determined by behavioral indicators of satiation. Thus, the MO manipulation was directly linked to assessment results for each participant. The decrease in challenging behavior and increase in academic engagement reported here may also depend, in part, on the characteristics of the participants. Each participant had a diagnosis of an autism spectrum disorder. It is possible that the MO manipulation addressed a core behavioral characteristic of autism. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM-IV) describes individuals with autism as often engaging in compulsive or repetitive behaviors. All participants in this study engaged with their preferred tangible in a restrictive and repetitive manner. Jacob sang “Twinkle, twinkle litter star” into his microphone repeatedly and would verbally protest when asked to sing a different song. Geoffrey counted each ball as it exited the plastic ball drop. Finally, Donovan drew the uppercase and lowercase letters F and R on the Magna Doodle®. The presession access to the toys may have reduced the value of the participants’ compulsive engagement with these items thereby allowing them to engage in other behaviors, including academic engagement. Several limitations of this study must be considered when interpreting these results. First, the influence of MOs is only one explanation for the changes in performance. Other behavioral mechanisms (e.g., schedules of reinforcement) may have influenced the results even though the manipulation of the MO fits conceptually with the outcomes of this study and supports previous research in this area. Second, the experimental design did not include a baseline phase. Thus, while the effects of the presession satiation condition appeared to improve both dependent variables as compared to the no presession access condition, a comparison against baseline levels of these responses cannot be made. Third, the duration of presession satiation conditions varied 616 / 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:
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 81 and 82:
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 101 and 102: Education and Training in Autism an
Page 103 and 104: TABLE 1 Studies Listed According to
Page 105 and 106: 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 121 and 122: Education and Training in Autism an
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: challenging behavior in the presess
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?