Repp A C, Barton L E
J Appl Behav Anal. 1980 Summer;13(2):333-41. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1980.13-333.
In the last several years, various organizations have produced strikingly similar documents by which institutions for retarded persons are judged for licensure. The purpose of the present study was to determine whether residential units that were licensed differed from residential units that were not licensed in terms of the active programming behaviors of their staff and residents. Data were collected through a time-sampling procedure that yielded about 160,000 observations on eight staff and six resident behaviors. Results showed that the licensed units were just as derelict as unlicensed units in providing habilitative programming for their retarded residents. Maladaptive responding by residents occurred at least as much as task-related residents. Maladaptive responding by residents occurred at least as much as task-related behaviors: residents spent as much time self-stimulating as they did in programming; they also engaged in self-abusive behavior about as much time as they engaged in on-task responding. Results were discussed in terms of the failure of governmental regulations that are not based on observation to adequately assess habilitative programming.
在过去几年里，各类组织出台了极为相似的文件，用于评判智障人士机构的执照发放情况。本研究的目的是确定已获执照的居住单元与未获执照的居住单元在工作人员和居民的积极规划行为方面是否存在差异。数据通过时间抽样程序收集，该程序产生了约160,000条关于8种工作人员行为和6种居民行为的观察结果。结果表明，在为智障居民提供适应性训练规划方面，获执照的单元与未获执照的单元一样玩忽职守。居民的适应不良反应至少与任务相关行为出现的频率一样多：居民自我刺激的时间与参与规划的时间一样多；他们进行自我虐待行为的时间也与参与任务相关反应的时间大致相同。研究结果从基于观察的政府监管未能充分评估适应性训练规划的角度进行了讨论。
