O'Brien Matthew J, Pauls Alexander M, Schieltz Kelly M, McComas Jennifer J, Ringdahl Joel E
University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA USA.
University of Iowa Stead Family Department of Pediatrics, Iowa City, IA USA.
Behav Anal Pract. 2023 Jul 6;17(1):228-245. doi: 10.1007/s40617-023-00829-6. eCollection 2024 Mar.
The extant literature demonstrates that individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) exhibit preferences among communication modalities when multiple modalities are available and produce reinforcement on identical reinforcement schedules. High- and low-tech communication options, such as voice output devices and picture cards, are commonly recommended for individuals with limited vocal communication skills. In this study, we conducted a systematic literature review of research studies that implemented mand modality preference assessments (MMPAs) that included both a high- and low-tech communication option with individuals with IDD. We identified 27 studies meeting our inclusion criteria and summarized the participant demographics, MMPA design and procedural variations, and MMPA outcomes. The results suggested that high-tech communication options were generally more preferred over low-tech options. However, there was a high degree of variability in how the studies were conducted and conclusions were reached. We discuss some of the current research gaps and the implications for clinical practice.
现有文献表明,当有多种沟通方式可供选择时,智力和发育障碍(IDD)患者会表现出对不同沟通方式的偏好,并且在相同的强化程序下会产生强化作用。对于语音沟通技能有限的患者,通常会推荐高科技和低科技的沟通方式,如语音输出设备和图片卡片。在本研究中,我们对实施了指令模态偏好评估(MMPA)的研究进行了系统的文献综述,这些研究包括为IDD患者提供高科技和低科技沟通方式。我们确定了27项符合纳入标准的研究,并总结了参与者的人口统计学特征、MMPA设计和程序差异以及MMPA结果。结果表明,与低科技方式相比,高科技沟通方式通常更受青睐。然而,这些研究的实施方式和得出结论的方式存在很大差异。我们讨论了当前一些研究差距以及对临床实践的影响。