Sara Spevack, Lisa Wright, C T Yu, Kerri L Walters, Stephen Holborn
{"title":"重度多重残疾及运动障碍儿童偏好评估之被动与主动方法反应。","authors":"Sara Spevack, Lisa Wright, C T Yu, Kerri L Walters, Stephen Holborn","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We assessed the activity preferences of three children with profound multiple disabilities and minimal movement using a single stimulus presentation procedure. We recorded active approach, passive approach, and rejection responses on each trial during the assessments. Active approach included reaching for, touching, or manipulating the stimulus. Passive approach included looking at or orienting toward the stimulus and happiness indicators such as smiling. Active approaches and rejection responses were infrequent, but preference hierarchies based on passive approaches emerged for all three children. Two children were available for reinforcer testing after the preference assessments. The identified high preference activities based on passive approach responses maintained higher rates of switch pressing than the low preference activities for one child and maintained approximately the same rates of switch pressing for the second child.</p>","PeriodicalId":93663,"journal":{"name":"Journal on developmental disabilities = Le journal sur les handicaps du development [sic.]","volume":"14 2","pages":"61-68"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3608576/pdf/nihms2616.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"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\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>We assessed the activity preferences of three children with profound multiple disabilities and minimal movement using a single stimulus presentation procedure. We recorded active approach, passive approach, and rejection responses on each trial during the assessments. Active approach included reaching for, touching, or manipulating the stimulus. Passive approach included looking at or orienting toward the stimulus and happiness indicators such as smiling. Active approaches and rejection responses were infrequent, but preference hierarchies based on passive approaches emerged for all three children. Two children were available for reinforcer testing after the preference assessments. The identified high preference activities based on passive approach responses maintained higher rates of switch pressing than the low preference activities for one child and maintained approximately the same rates of switch pressing for the second child.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93663,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal on developmental disabilities = Le journal sur les handicaps du development [sic.]\",\"volume\":\"14 2\",\"pages\":\"61-68\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2008-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3608576/pdf/nihms2616.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal on developmental disabilities = Le journal sur les handicaps du development [sic.]\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal on developmental disabilities = Le journal sur les handicaps du development [sic.]","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Passive and Active Approach Responses in Preference Assessment for Children With Profound Multiple Disabilities and Minimal Movement.
We assessed the activity preferences of three children with profound multiple disabilities and minimal movement using a single stimulus presentation procedure. We recorded active approach, passive approach, and rejection responses on each trial during the assessments. Active approach included reaching for, touching, or manipulating the stimulus. Passive approach included looking at or orienting toward the stimulus and happiness indicators such as smiling. Active approaches and rejection responses were infrequent, but preference hierarchies based on passive approaches emerged for all three children. Two children were available for reinforcer testing after the preference assessments. The identified high preference activities based on passive approach responses maintained higher rates of switch pressing than the low preference activities for one child and maintained approximately the same rates of switch pressing for the second child.