Preferences and Reinforcers for Students With Profound Multiple Disabilities: Can We Identify Them?

Springer Science and Business Media LLC - 2001
Kent R. Logan1, Heidi A. Jacobs2, David L. Gast3, Pamela D. Smith4, Jackie Daniel5, JoAnn Rawls5
1Kennesaw State University, USA
2City Schools of Decatur, USA
3University of Georgia;
4Birmingham
5Gwinnett County Public Schools, USA

Tóm tắt

Previous research has documented that there are limits to our current knowledge about procedures for identifying preferences and reinforcers for individuals with profound multiple disabilities as compared with other individuals with less significant disabilities. In this paper, we review the procedures used by other researchers to assess preferences and identify reinforcers for these individuals. Two experiments were completed that adapted the preference assessment and reinforcer testing procedures described by these researchers. These included changes in the trial and session format and the type of stimuli presented during the preference assessment, types of student behavior studies, and the research design used during reinforcement testing. Results show that while more preferences were identified with the adapted procedures, this increase did not lead to the identification of more effective reinforcers. The reinforcing effects of the preferred stimuli were idiosyncratic among the students and the data were variable both within and across participants. Implications for practice are discussed.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Bayley, N. (1969). Bayley Scales of Infant Development. Psychological Corporation, New York.

Billingsley, F., White, O. R., and Munson, R. (1980). Procedural reliability: A rationale and an example. Behav. Assess. 2: 229-241.

Ferguson, D. L., Wills, C., and Sutton, K. A. (1996). Widening the stream:Ways to think about including exceptions” in schools. In Lehr, D. H., and Brown, F. (eds.), People With Disabilities Who Challenge the System, Paul Brookes, Baltimore, pp. 99-126.

Fisher, W., Piazza, C. C., Bowman, L. G., Hagopian, L. P., Owens, J. C., and Slevin, I. (1992). A comparison of two approaches for identifying reinforcers for persons with severe and profound disabilities. J. Appl. Behav. Anal. 25: 491-498.

Gee, K., Graham, N., Sailor, W., and Goetz, L. (1995). Use of integrated school and community settings as primary contexts for skill acquisition of students with severe multiple disabilities. Behav. Modific. 19: 33-58.

Ginsburg, H. P., and Opper, S. (1988). Piaget's Theory of Intellectual Development. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Green, C. W., Reid, H. D., Canipe, V. S., and Gardner, S.M. (1991).A comprehensive evaluation of reinforcer identification processes for persons with profound multiple handicaps. J. Appl. Behav. Anal. 24: 537-552.

Green, C. W., Reid, D. H., White, L. K., Halford, R. C., Brittain, D. P., and Gardner, S. M. (1988). Identifying reinforcers for persons with profound handicaps: Staff opinion versus systematic assessment of preferences. J. and Appl. Behav. Anal. 21: 31-43.

Ivancic, M. T., and Bailey, J. S. (1996). Current limits to reinforcer identification for some persons with profound multiple disabilities. Res. Develop. Disabi. 17: 77-92.

Kazdin, A. A. (1982). Single-Case Research Designs: Methods for Clinical and Applied Settings, Oxford University Press, New York.

Kennedy, C. H., and Haring, T. G. (1993). Teaching choice making during social interactions to student with profound multiple disabilities. J. Appl. Behav. Anal. 26d: 63-76.

Landesman-Dwyer, S., and Sackett, G. P. (1978). Behavior changes in nonambulatory, profoundly mentally retarded individuals. In Meyers, C. E. (ed.), Quality of Life in Severely and Profoundly Retarded People: Research Foundations for Improvement, American Association on Mental Deficiency, Washington, pp. 55-144.

Leatherby, J. G., Gast, D. L., Wolery, M., and Collins, B. C. (1992). Assessment of reinforcer preference in multi-handicapped students. J. Develop. Phys. Disab. 4: 15-36.

Logan, K. R., Alberto, P. A., Kana, T. G., and Waylor-Bowen, T. (1994). Curriculum development and instructional design for students with profound disabilities. In Sternberg, L. (ed.), Individuals with Profound Disabilities: Assistive and Instructional Strategie, ProEd, Austin, TX. pp. 333-384.

Pace, G. M., Ivancic, M. T., Edwards, G. L., Iwata, B. A., and Page, T. J. (1985). Assessment of stimulus preference and reinforcer value with profoundly retarded individuals. J. Appl. Behav. Anal. 18: 249-255.

Piazza, C. C., Fisher, W. W., Hanley, G. P., Hilker, K., and Derby, K. M. (1996). A preliminary procedure for predicting the positive and negative effects of reinforcement-based procedures. J. Appl. Behav. Anal. 29: 137-152.

Rainforth, B. (1982). Biobehavior state and orienting: Implications for educating profoundly retarded students. J. Assoc. Persons Severe Handicaps. 6: 33-37.

Realon, R. E., Favell, J. E., and Dayvault, K. A. (1988). Evaluating the use of adapted leisure materials on the engagement of persons who are profoundly, multiply handicapped. Educ. Train. Ment. Retard. 3: 228-237.

Reid, D. H., Phillips, J. F., and Green, C. W. (1991). Teaching persons with profound multiple handicaps:Areview of the effects of behavioral research. J. Appl. Behav. Anal. 24: 319-336.

Smith, R. G., Iwata, B. A., and Shore, B. A. (1995). Effects of subject versus experimenter selected reinforcers on the behavior of individuals with profound developmental disabilities. J. Appl. Behav. Anal. 28: 61-71.

Stillman, R. D. (1979). Callier-Azusa Scale, Council for Exceptional Children, Reston, VA.

Switzky, H. N., Woolsey-Hill, J., and Quoss, T. (1979). Habituation of visual fixation responses: An assessment tool to measure visual sensory-perceptual cognitive processes in nonverbal profoundly handicapped children in the classroom. Am. Assoc. Educ. Severely Profoundly Handicapped Rev. 4: 136-147.

Tawney, J. W., and Gast, D. L. (1984). Single Subject Research in Special Education, Charles Merrill, Columbus, OH.

Vulpe, S. G. (1977). Vulpe Assessment Battery, National Institute on Mental Retardation, Toronto.

Wacker, D. P., Berg, W. K., Wiggins, B., Muldoon, M., and Cavanaugh, J. (1985). Evaluation of reinforcer preferences for profoundly handicapped students. J. Appl. Behav. Anal. 18: 173-178.

Wacker, D. P., Wiggins, B., Fowler, M., and Berg, W. (1988). Training students with profound or multiple handicaps to make requests vis microswitches. J. Appl. Behav. Anal. 21: 331-343.

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Thông tin tác giả