• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

识别引发问题行为的教学任务,并评估在这些任务中由学生选择与由教师选择所产生的效果。

Identifying instructional tasks that occasion problem behaviors and assessing the effects of student versus teacher choice among these tasks.

作者信息

Vaughn B J, Horner R H

机构信息

University of Oregon, USA.

出版信息

J Appl Behav Anal. 1997 Summer;30(2):299-311; quiz 312. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1997.30-299.

DOI:10.1901/jaba.1997.30-299
PMID:9210308
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1284047/
Abstract

Levels of problem behavior were assessed when 4 students with severe disabilities received instruction on preferred versus nonpreferred tasks and when tasks of each type were chosen by the teacher rather than by the student. In Phase 1, interview and direct observation assessments were conducted to identify relative preferences for academic tasks. In Phase 2, the effects of these lower preference and higher preference tasks on the rate of problem behavior were evaluated using a multielement design. The results showed that lower preference tasks were associated with higher rates of problem behaviors and that students, when given a choice, consistently selected the tasks that had been identified through interview and direct observation as higher preference. In Phase 3, we assessed whether allowing the students to choose between pairs of lower preference tasks or between pairs of higher preference tasks reduced problem behavior relative to a condition in which the teacher selected the same tasks. For 2 of 4 students, the rates of problem behavior were lower when students (rather than the teacher) selected the lower preference activity. Higher preference tasks for 3 students were associated with relatively low rates of problem behavior regardless of whether the student or the teacher selected the task.

摘要

当4名重度残疾学生接受关于偏好任务与非偏好任务的教学时,以及当每种类型的任务由教师而非学生选择时,对问题行为水平进行了评估。在第1阶段,进行了访谈和直接观察评估,以确定对学业任务的相对偏好。在第2阶段,使用多元素设计评估了这些低偏好任务和高偏好任务对问题行为发生率的影响。结果表明,低偏好任务与较高的问题行为发生率相关,并且当给予选择时,学生始终选择通过访谈和直接观察确定为高偏好的任务。在第3阶段,我们评估了相对于教师选择相同任务的情况,允许学生在低偏好任务对或高偏好任务对之间进行选择是否会减少问题行为。对于4名学生中的2名,当学生(而非教师)选择低偏好活动时,问题行为发生率较低。无论任务是由学生还是教师选择,3名学生的高偏好任务与相对较低的问题行为发生率相关。

相似文献

1
Identifying instructional tasks that occasion problem behaviors and assessing the effects of student versus teacher choice among these tasks.识别引发问题行为的教学任务,并评估在这些任务中由学生选择与由教师选择所产生的效果。
J Appl Behav Anal. 1997 Summer;30(2):299-311; quiz 312. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1997.30-299.
2
Sequencing instructional tasks. A comparison of contingent and noncontingent interspersal of preferred academic tasks.
Behav Modif. 2003 Apr;27(2):191-216. doi: 10.1177/0145445503251577.
3
Effects of choice making on the serious problem behaviors of students with severe handicaps.选择行为对重度残疾学生严重问题行为的影响。
J Appl Behav Anal. 1990 Winter;23(4):515-24. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1990.23-515.
4
On the relative reinforcing effects of choice and differential consequences.关于选择和差别性后果的相对强化作用。
J Appl Behav Anal. 1997 Fall;30(3):423-38. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1997.30-423.
5
Generating hypotheses about the function of student problem behavior by observing teacher behavior.通过观察教师行为来生成关于学生问题行为功能的假设。
J Appl Behav Anal. 1994 Summer;27(2):251-65. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1994.27-251.
6
Preferred curricular activities and reduced problem behaviors in students with intellectual disabilities.智障学生的首选课程活动与问题行为减少
J Appl Behav Anal. 1994 Fall;27(3):493-504. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1994.27-493.
7
Teacher- versus peer-mediated instruction: an ecobehavioral analysis of achievement outcomes.教师与同伴介导的教学:对学业成绩结果的生态行为分析。
J Appl Behav Anal. 1984 Winter;17(4):521-38. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1984.17-521.
8
Instructional interactions of students with cognitive disabilities: sequential analysis.认知障碍学生的教学互动:序列分析
Am J Ment Retard. 2007 Mar;112(2):94-106. doi: 10.1352/0895-8017(2007)112[94:IIOSWC]2.0.CO;2.
9
Considering student choice when selecting instructional strategies: a comparison of three prompting systems.选择教学策略时考虑学生的选择:三种提示系统的比较
Res Dev Disabil. 2005 Sep-Oct;26(5):411-32. doi: 10.1016/j.ridd.2004.07.006. Epub 2004 Dec 13.
10
The influence of activity choice on problem behaviors maintained by escape versus attention.活动选择对因逃避或寻求关注而维持的问题行为的影响。
J Appl Behav Anal. 2002 Winter;35(4):349-62. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2002.35-349.

引用本文的文献

1
Effects of Differential Consequences on Choice Making in Students at Risk for Academic Failure.不同后果对学业失败风险学生决策的影响。
Behav Anal Pract. 2018 May 31;12(1):154-161. doi: 10.1007/s40617-018-0267-3. eCollection 2019 Mar.
2
Systematic Changes in Preference for Schedule-Thinning Arrangements as a Function of Relative Reinforcement Density.作为相对强化密度函数的时间表稀疏安排偏好的系统性变化。
Behav Modif. 2018 Jul;42(4):472-497. doi: 10.1177/0145445517742883. Epub 2017 Nov 28.
3
Using choice to increase on-task behavior in individuals with traumatic brain injury.运用选择来增加创伤性脑损伤患者的任务执行行为。
J Appl Behav Anal. 2008 Summer;41(2):261-5. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2008.41-261.
4
Further examination of factors that influence preference for positive versus negative reinforcement.进一步研究影响对正强化与负强化偏好的因素。
J Appl Behav Anal. 2007 Spring;40(1):25-44. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2007.151-05.
5
An enriched teaching program for reducing resistance and indices of unhappiness among individuals with profound multiple disabilities.一项旨在降低重度多重残疾个体的抗拒行为和不幸福感指标的强化教学计划。
J Appl Behav Anal. 2005 Summer;38(2):221-33. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2005.4-04.
6
Functional analysis of problem behavior: a review.问题行为的功能分析:综述
J Appl Behav Anal. 2003 Summer;36(2):147-85. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2003.36-147.
7
The influence of activity choice on problem behaviors maintained by escape versus attention.活动选择对因逃避或寻求关注而维持的问题行为的影响。
J Appl Behav Anal. 2002 Winter;35(4):349-62. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2002.35-349.
8
Stimulus characteristics within directives: effects on accuracy of task completion.指令中的刺激特征:对任务完成准确性的影响。
J Appl Behav Anal. 2001 Fall;34(3):289-312. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2001.34-289.
9
Escape behavior during academic tasks: a preliminary analysis of idiosyncratic establishing operations.学术任务中的逃避行为:对特质性建立操作的初步分析
J Appl Behav Anal. 2000 Winter;33(4):479-93. doi: 10.1901/jaba.2000.33-479.
10
A comparison of presession and within-session reinforcement choice.会前与会中强化选择的比较。
J Appl Behav Anal. 1999 Summer;32(2):161-73. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1999.32-161.

本文引用的文献

1
Basic research needed for stimulating the development of behavioral technologies.刺激行为技术发展的基础研究。
J Exp Anal Behav. 1994 May;61(3):529-50. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1994.61-529.
2
Progressing from brief assessments to extended experimental analyses in the evaluation of aberrant behavior.从简要评估到扩展实验分析评估异常行为。
J Appl Behav Anal. 1995 Winter;28(4):561-76. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1995.28-561.
3
Integrating caregiver report with systematic choice assessment to enhance reinforcer identification.整合照顾者报告与系统的选择评估以加强强化物识别。
Am J Ment Retard. 1996 Jul;101(1):15-25.
4
Validating predicted activity preferences of individuals with severe disabilities.验证重度残疾个体的预测活动偏好。
J Appl Behav Anal. 1993 Summer;26(2):239-45. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1993.26-239.
5
Toward a functional analysis of self-injury.迈向自我伤害的功能分析。
J Appl Behav Anal. 1994 Summer;27(2):197-209. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1994.27-197.
6
Choice making to promote adaptive behavior for students with emotional and behavioral challenges.做出选择以促进有情绪和行为障碍的学生的适应性行为。
J Appl Behav Anal. 1994 Fall;27(3):505-18. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1994.27-505.
7
Identifying the variables maintaining self-injurious behavior.识别维持自伤行为的变量。
J Autism Dev Disord. 1988 Mar;18(1):99-117. doi: 10.1007/BF02211821.
8
Functional and structural analyses of behavior: approaches leading to reduced use of punishment procedures?行为的功能与结构分析:是否会减少惩罚程序使用的方法?
Res Dev Disabil. 1987;8(2):165-78. doi: 10.1016/0891-4222(87)90001-1.
9
Basing the treatment of stereotypic and self-injurious behaviors on hypotheses of their causes.基于刻板行为和自伤行为的成因假设对其进行治疗。
J Appl Behav Anal. 1988 Fall;21(3):281-9. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1988.21-281.
10
Identifying reinforcers for persons with profound handicaps: staff opinion versus systematic assessment of preferences.识别重度残障人士的强化物:工作人员意见与偏好的系统评估
J Appl Behav Anal. 1988 Spring;21(1):31-43. doi: 10.1901/jaba.1988.21-31.