اثربخشی بازخورد ویدئویی و خودمدیریتی بر رفتار اجتماعی نامناسب جوانان با عقب ماندگی ذهنی خفیف

The effectiveness of a video feedback and self-management package was assessed with various inappropriate behaviors exhibited by six youth with mild mental retardation. The procedure consisted of (a) videotaping participants’ inappropriate behavior, (b) having them self-monitor and record their behavior, (c) prompting them to evaluate their behavior against a criterion, and (d) allowing to reinforce themselves for appropriate behaviors. Data were collected within a nonconcurrent multiple baseline design across participants. Results showed a statistically significant decrease of the percentage intervals of inappropriate behavior when the procedure was in effect. The total number of interactions remained stable across the different phases of the study. Video feedback and self-management contributed to generalization across settings.

During the last two decades, much attention has been given to the social behaviors of persons with mild mental retardation. These people tend to exhibit more social behavior deficits and inappropriate behaviors as compared to peers without disabilities (e.g., Schumaker, Pederson, Hazel, & Meyen, 1983). Deficient social behaviors hinder their integration into the mainstream of society. As integration of people with a handicap receives high priority it is clear that this area deserves attention from behavior analysts. Various strategies have been employed to improve social behaviors, such as instruction, modeling, role playing, behavior rehearsal, coaching, feedback, homework, and reinforcement (e.g., Amish et al 1988 and Bates 1980). Although these procedures have demonstrated their effectiveness on the acquisition of social behaviors, they are also associated with several shortcomings. Due to their reliance on external control, the effects obtained have, by definition, limited generalizability to natural settings. The validity of procedures to establish social behaviors depends therefore, upon the degree to which the behaviors to be taught generalize across settings, time, and responses. Stokes and Osnes (1989) indicate that generalization of behaviors is more likely to occur if a procedure is at least partly conducted in natural settings. A problem of this approach is, however, the staff time needed to conduct such procedures in natural settings. Moreover, external contingencies may then interfere with ongoing interactions. Self-management is one of the strategies that may provide a solution to this problem Ferretti et al 1993 and Harchik et al 1992. Self-management has been defined as the application of operant procedures to one’s own behavior (Skinner, 1973). Procedures of self-management, such as self-monitoring, self-recording, self-evaluation, and self-administering consequences have shown to be effective with various populations and target behaviors (e.g., Cavalier et al 1997 and Dunlap et al 1991). Research has shown that self-monitoring can be helpful in reducing external control and by consequence, to facilitate generalization across stimulus dimensions (e.g., Koegel and Koegel 1990, Lonnecker et al 1994 and Rhode et al 1983). Despite these advantages, self-monitoring requires immediate self-recording of target behavior(s). It might be argued that such recording may disturb ongoing social interactions. For establishing social behaviors the use of videorecording may be considered, which involves recording participants while they are interacting with others and then having them view a playback (e.g., Booth & Fairbank, 1984). Research on this means has shown that video feedback improves responding of behaviorally disordered children (Osborne, Kiburz, & Miller, 1986), on-task performance of children with emotional and behavioral disorders (Walther & Beare, 1991), peer interactions of students with emotional and behavioral disorders Falk et al 1996, Kern-Dunlap et al 1992 and Kern et al 1995, and productivity of an adult worker with moderate mental retardation (Cavaiuolo & Gradel, 1990). The purpose of the present study was to assess the effectiveness of a video feedback and self-management package on the frequency of inappropriate social behavior exhibited by youth with mild mental retardation. The procedure encompassed (a) videotaping participants during lunch and dinner time and during group meetings, (b) while viewing the video, having them monitor and record their own behavior (i.e., self-monitoring), (c) having them evaluate their own behavior by comparing it to a criterion, and (d) allowing to reinforce themselves for appropriate behaviors, using a token system.

3.1. Reliability 3.1.1. Reliability of recording Mean reliability for occurrences of interaction and the assessment of the interaction (i.e., appropriate, other inappropriate, or target) was 89.16% (range, 80.46 to 97.96%) and 84.37% (range, 51.28 to 100%), respectively. For occurrences of interaction, a mean kappa of 0.79 (range, 0.26 to 0.95) was found. For assessment of the interaction kappa was 0.58 (range, 0.11 to 1). 3.1.2. Procedural reliability The trainer provided the training in 100%, 100% and 75% of the instances correctly for stopping the videotape, asking the participant to record, and to describe the stimulus and consequence of target behavior, respectively. The participants used the self-management strategies, that is, recorded their target behavior, compared these to their own criterion, and reinforced themselves correctly in 94%, 88%, and 100% of the training sessions, respectively. The trainer praised the participant correctly for recording appropriate interactions, asked for more appropriate interactions, reviewed specific parts of the video, and reviewed the definition of appropriate behavior in 75, 91, 87, 93, and 67% of the training sessions, respectively. 3.2. Performance Fig. 2 shows the percentages of total interactions that encompassed target behavior per session across the different phases of the study for each of the six participants. During baseline, the mean percentage of target behavior per session for Tom was 8.9 (range, from 0 to 23.5%). Following introduction of video feedback and self-management, this percentage decreased to 1.4 (range, 0 to 9.3%). Paul showed a reduction from a mean of 18.9% (range, 3.6 to 40.7%) during baseline to a mean of 9.7% (range, 0 to 26.2%) during intervention. The effect for Jeffrey is less clear. He showed a minor decrease in mean percentage target behavior, that is, from a mean of 13.6 (range, 4.8 to 24.3%) during baseline to a mean of 10.8 (range, 0 to 27.8%) during intervention. Robin, John, and Karen showed a decrease from a mean of 22.1% (range, 4.3 to 43.8%), 18.6% (range, 7.1 to 33.3%), and 21.4% (range, 4 to 38.4%) of total interactions that encompassed target behavior during baseline to 5.3% (range, 0 to 22.6%), 13.0% (range, 0 to 19.3%), and 7.5% (range, 1.8 to 20.8%) during intervention, respectively. The maintenance phase was in effect for Tom, Paul, and Robin. For Jeffrey, however, the maintenance phase was withheld because he failed to attain criterion (see Procedure). The maintenance phase was withheld for John and Karen because of logistical reasons. Fig. 2 shows that during maintenance, the mean percentage of target behavior per session for Tom, Paul, and Robin remained below baseline, with values of 1.9, 8.2, and 7.4%, respectively. Full-size image (16 K) Fig. 2. The Percentages of Total Interactions that encompassed Target Behavior during Phases of Baseline and Video Feedback and Self-Management for the Six Participants. Figure options Table 2shows mean percentages of the occurrence of interaction and interactions recorded as appropriate, other inappropriate, and target. Table 2. Mean Percentage of Responses during the Conditions of Baseline, Intervention, and Maintenance for the 6 Participants Baseline Intervention Occurrence Appropriatea Other Inappropriatea Targeta Occurrence Appropriatea Tom 37.1 87.1 4.0 8.9 44.9 93.0 Paul 52.9 71.8 9.3 18.9 58.9 77.7 Jeffrey 49.1 78.9 7.5 13.6 47.8 81.5 Robin 46.1 67.9 10.0 22.1 46.6 84.7 John 48.6 75.3 6.1 18.6 50.1 79.8 Karen 46.1 76.7 1.9 21.4 43.8 90.7 InappropriateaTargetOccurenceAppropriateaInappropriateaTargeta Intervention Maintenance Other Inappropriatea Target Occurrence Appropriatea Other Inappropriatea Targeta 5.6 1.4 57.3 93.8 4.3 1.9 12.6 9.7 56.0 76.8 15.0 8.2 7.7 10.8 10.0 5.3 29.8 77.6 15.0 7.4 7.2 13.0 1.8 7.5 a These percentages are portion of the whole percentage of occurrences of interactions during the present phase. For example, during baseline Tom had a mean percentage of occurrences of interactions of 37.1; 87.1, 4.0, and 8.9% of these interactions were recorded as appropriate, other inappropriate and target, respectively. Table options To corroborate trends revealed by visual inspection, interrupted time-series analysis (Oud, Reelick, Raaymakers, Wouters, & van Eekelen, 1993) was conducted. A statistically significant difference was found between the phases of baseline and intervention for target behavior, p = .0113, revealing a decrease of the percentage of total interactions that involved target behavior. Time-series analysis failed, however, to reveal any statistically significant differences between baseline and video feedback and self-management with respect to the responses occurrences of interaction, appropriate interactions, and other inappropriate interactions.