Literature DB >> 8750077

Current limits to reinforcer identification for some persons with profound multiple disabilities.

M T Ivancic1, J S Bailey.   

Abstract

Fifteen persons with profound mental retardation were divided into two groups. One group was identified with chronic training needs by habilitative staff and the other group served as a control. In an attempt to identify a reinforcer, each participant received a preference assessment and a simple, low-effort treatment procedure. In Experiment 1, only individuals who approached at least one stimulus on 80% or more of the preference assessment trials ("high preference") showed reinforcement effects in treatment. However, three individuals showing high preference failed to show treatment effects. All persons identified with chronic training needs failed to show reinforcement effects. Experiment 2 analyzed characteristics of the two groups and found significant differences in overall movement and response latency. Limitations of the current reinforcement technology were apparent for identifying reinforcers in the group with chronic training problems. Research is suggested for evaluating training alternatives for people with profound multiple disabilities who move very little or who respond with very long latencies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8750077     DOI: 10.1016/0891-4222(95)00038-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Res Dev Disabil        ISSN: 0891-4222


  11 in total

1.  Effects of reinforcement for alternative behavior during punishment of self-injury.

Authors:  R H Thompson; B A Iwata; J Conners; E M Roscoe
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  1999

2.  Evaluation of a brief stimulus preference assessment.

Authors:  H S Roane; T R Vollmer; J E Ringdahl; B A Marcus
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  1998

3.  A descriptive analysis of potential reinforcement contingencies in the preschool classroom.

Authors:  Paige M McKerchar; Rachel H Thompson
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  2004

4.  Innovation of a reinforcer preference assessment with the difficult to test.

Authors:  Muriel D Saunders; Richard R Saunders
Journal:  Res Dev Disabil       Date:  2011-03-15

5.  An enriched teaching program for reducing resistance and indices of unhappiness among individuals with profound multiple disabilities.

Authors:  Carolyn W Green; Dennis H Reid; Jeannia H Rollyson; Susan C Passante
Journal:  J Appl Behav Anal       Date:  2005

Review 6.  Stimulus Preference Assessment Decision-Making System (SPADS): A Decision-Making Model for Practitioners.

Authors:  Jordan D Lill; Mark D Shriver; Keith D Allen
Journal:  Behav Anal Pract       Date:  2021-04-30

7.  Predicting Optimal Preference Assessment Methods for Individuals with Developmental Disabilities.

Authors:  Kendra M Thomson; Diana Czarnecki; Toby L Martin; C T Yu; Garry L Martin
Journal:  Educ Train Dev Disabil       Date:  2007-03

8.  Passive and Active Approach Responses in Preference Assessment for Children With Profound Multiple Disabilities and Minimal Movement.

Authors:  Sara Spevack; Lisa Wright; C T Yu; Kerri L Walters; Stephen Holborn
Journal:  J Dev Disabl       Date:  2008

9.  SENSITIVITY OF PASSIVE APPROACH DURING PREFERENCE AND REINFORCER ASSESSMENTS FOR CHILDREN WITH SEVERE AND PROFOUND INTELLECTUAL DISABILITIES AND MINIMAL MOVEMENT.

Authors:  Sara Spevack; C T Yu; May S Lee; Garry L Martin
Journal:  Behav Interv       Date:  2006-07

10.  Microswitch programs for persons with multiple disabilities: an overview of the responses adopted for microswitch activation.

Authors:  Giulio E Lancioni; Nirbhay N Singh; Mark F O'Reilly; Doretta Oliva
Journal:  Cogn Process       Date:  2005-07-19
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.