Ivancic M T, Bailey J S
Western Carolina Center, Morganton, NC 28655-4608, USA.
Res Dev Disabil. 1996 Jan-Feb;17(1):77-92. doi: 10.1016/0891-4222(95)00038-0.
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.
15名重度智力障碍者被分为两组。一组被康复工作人员确定为有长期训练需求,另一组作为对照组。为了确定强化物,每位参与者都接受了偏好评估和一个简单、低强度的治疗程序。在实验1中,只有在偏好评估试验中至少对80%或更多的刺激有接近行为的个体(“高偏好”)在治疗中表现出强化效果。然而,三名表现出高偏好的个体并未表现出治疗效果。所有被确定有长期训练需求的个体都未表现出强化效果。实验2分析了两组的特征,发现整体运动和反应潜伏期存在显著差异。在确定有长期训练问题的组中的强化物时,当前强化技术的局限性显而易见。建议开展研究,以评估针对极少运动或反应潜伏期极长的重度多重残疾者的训练替代方案。