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。

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,&nbsp;Lisa Wright,&nbsp;C T Yu,&nbsp;Kerri L Walters,&nbsp;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,&nbsp;Lisa Wright,&nbsp;C T Yu,&nbsp;Kerri L Walters,&nbsp;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}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们使用单一刺激呈现程序评估了三名患有严重多重残疾和最小运动的儿童的活动偏好。在评估期间,我们记录了每次试验的主动方法、被动方法和排斥反应。主动方法包括伸手、触摸或操纵刺激物。被动方法包括看或指向刺激和幸福指标,如微笑。主动方法和拒绝反应并不常见,但基于被动方法的偏好等级在所有三个孩子身上都出现了。两名儿童在偏好评估后进行强化测试。根据被动方法反应确定的高偏好活动比低偏好活动对一个孩子保持更高的开关按下率,并且对第二个孩子保持大致相同的开关按下率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信