A practitioner’s guide to emphasizing choice-making opportunities in behavioral services provided to individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities

References

• Agran, M., Storey, K. and Krupp, M. 2010. Choosing and choice making are not the same: Asking “what do you want for lunch?” is not self-determination. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 33, 77–88.
   Google Scholar
• Bannerman, D. J., Sheldon, J. B., Sherman, J. A. and Harchik, A. E. 1990. Balancing the right to habilitation with the right to personal liberties: The rights of people with developmental disabilities to eat too many doughnuts and take a nap. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 23, 79–89.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baum, W. M. 1972. Choice in a continuous procedure. Psychonomic Science, 28, 263–265.
   Google Scholar
• Beavers, G. A., Iwata, B. A. and Lerman, D. C. 2013. Thirty years of research on the functional analysis of problem behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 46, 1–21.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borrero, J. C. and Vollmer, T. R. 2002. An application of the matching law to severe problem behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 35, 13–27.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braye, S., Orr, D. and Preston-Shoot, M. 2017. Autonomy and protection in self-neglect work: The ethical complexity of decision-making. Ethics and Social Welfare, 11, 320–335.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• British Institute on Learning Disabilities. (n.d.). About Bild: Our vision is a society where everyone can enjoy the same rights and opportunities. https://www.bild.org.uk/about-bild/
   Google Scholar
• Burke, K. M., Raley, S. K., Shogren, K. A., Hagiwara, M., Mumbardó-Adam, C., Uyanik, H. and Behrens, S. 2020. A meta-analysis of interventions to promote self-determination for students with disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 41, 176–188.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cannella, H. I., O'Reilly, M. F. and Lancioni, G. E. 2005. Choice and preference assessment research with people with severe to profound developmental disabilities: A review of the literature. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 26, 1–15.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carr, E. G., Dunlap, G., Horner, R. H., Koegel, R. L., Turnbull, A. P., Sailor, W., Anderson, J. L., Albin, R. W., Koegel, L. K. and Fox, L. 2002. Positive behavior support: Evolution of an applied science. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 4, 4–16.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Catania, A. C. 1975. Freedom and knowledge: An experimental analysis of preference in pigeons 1. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 24, 89–106.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cobb, H. 1973. Citizen advocacy and the rights of the handicapped. In: Citizen advocacy and protective services for the impaired and handicapped. Toronto, ON: National Institute on Mental Retardation, pp.149–161.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen-Almeida, D., Graff, R. B. and Ahearn, W. H. 2000. A comparison of verbal and tangible stimulus preference assessments. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 33, 329–334.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). 2006a, December. Article 26 – Habilitation and rehabilitation. United Nations. Department of Economic and Social Affairs. https://www.un.org/development/desa/disabilities/convention-on-the-rights-of-persons-with-disabilities/article-26-habilitation-and-rehabilitation.html
   Google Scholar
• Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). 2006b, December. Guiding principles of the convention. United Nations. Department of Economic and Social Affairs. https://www.un.org/development/desa/disabilities/convention-on-the-rights-of-persons-with-disabilities/guiding-principles-of-the-convention.html
   Google Scholar
• Deel, N. M., Brodhead, M. T., Akers, J. S., White, A. N. and Miranda, D. R. G. 2021. Teaching choice-making within activity schedules to children with autism. Behavioral Interventions, 36, 731–744.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeLeon, I. G., Fisher, W. W., Rodriguez‐Catter, V., Maglieri, K., Herman, K. and Marhefka, J. M. 2001. Examination of relative reinforcement effects of stimuli identified through pretreatment and daily brief preference assessments. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 34, 463–473.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frank-Crawford, M. A., Borrero, J. C., Newcomb, E. T., Chen, T. and Schmidt, J. D. 2019. Preference for and efficacy of accumulated and distributed response–reinforcer arrangements during skill acquisition. Journal of Behavioral Education, 28, 227–257.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ghaemmaghami, M., Hanley, G. P. and Jessel, J. 2016. Contingencies promote delay tolerance. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 49, 548–575.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gore, N. J., McGill, P., Toogood, S., Allen, D., Hughes, J. C., Baker, P., Hastings, R. P., Noone, S. J. and Denne, L. D. 2013. Definition and scope for positive behavioural support. International Journal of Positive Behavioural Support, 3, 14–23.
   Google Scholar
• Gover, H. C., Fahmie, T. A. and McKeown, C. A. 2019. A review of environmental enrichment as treatment for problem behavior maintained by automatic reinforcement. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 52, 299–314.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guarino, K., Soares, P., Konnath, K., Clervil, R. and Bassuk, E. 2009. Trauma-informed organizational toolkit. Center for Mental Health Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. https://www.air.org/sites/default/files/downloads/report/Trauma-Informed_Organizational_Toolkit_0.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Gurwitch, R. H., Silovsky, J. F., Schultz, S., Kees, M. and Burlingame, S. 2002. Reactions and guidelines for children following trauma/disaster. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 23, 93–99.
   Google Scholar
• Hanley, G. P., Jin, C. S., Vanselow, N. R. and Hanratty, L. A. 2014. Producing meaningful improvements in problem behavior of children with autism via synthesized analyses and treatments. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 47, 16–36. doi:10.1002/jaba.106. 24615474
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanley, G. P. 2010. Toward effective and preferred programming: A case for the objective measurement of social validity with recipients of behavior-change programs. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 3, 13–21.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hanley, G. P. 2012. Functional assessment of problem behavior: Dispelling myths, overcoming implementation obstacles, and developing new lore. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 5, 54–72.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hanley, G. P., Iwata, B. A. and Lindberg, J. S. 1999. Analysis of activity preferences as a function of differential consequences. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 32, 419–435.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Higbee, T. S., Carr, J. E. and Harrison, C. D. 1999. The effects of pictorial versus tangible stimuli in stimulus-preference assessments. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 20, 63–72.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holburn, S. 1997. A renaissance in residential behavior analysis? A historical perspective and a better way to help people with challenging behavior. The Behavior Analyst, 20, 61–85.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howell, M., Dounavi, K. and Storey, C. 2019. To choose or not to choose? A systematic literature review considering the effects of antecedent and consequence choice upon on-task and problem behaviour. Review Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 6, 63–84.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Inclusion Australia. n.d. What we do. https://www.inclusionaustralia.org.au/what-we-do/
   Google Scholar
• Iwata, B. A. and Dozier, C. L. 2008. Clinical application of functional analysis methodology. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 1, 3–9.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Iyengar, S. S. and Lepper, M. R. 2000. When choice is demotivating: Can one desire too much of a good thing? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 995–1006.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keller-Dupree, E. A. 2013. Understanding childhood trauma: Ten reminders for preventing retraumatization. The Practitioner Scholar. Journal of Counseling and Professional Psychology, 2, 1–11.
   Google Scholar
• Kennedy, C. H. and Haring, T. G. 1993. Teaching choice making during social interactions to students with profound multiple disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 26, 63–76.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kern, L., Vorndran, C. M., Hilt, A., Ringdahl, J. E., Adelman, B. E. and Dunlap, G. 1998. Choice as an intervention to improve behavior: A review of the literature. Journal of Behavioral Education, 8, 151–169.
   Google Scholar
• Lancioni, G. E., Singh, N. N., O'Reilly, M. F., Sigafoos, J., Alberti, G., Oliva, D. and Buono, S. 2011. A technology-aided stimulus choice program for two adults with multiple disabilities: Choice responses and mood. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 32, 2602–2607.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luke, L., Clare, I. C., Ring, H., Redley, M. and Watson, P. 2012. Decision-making difficulties experienced by adults with autism spectrum conditions. Autism, 16, 612–621.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lynn. 2012. Too much choice… https://includedbygrace.wordpress.com/2012/10/19/too-much-choice/
   Google Scholar
• Marsh, P. and Kelly, L. 2018. Dignity of risk in the community: A review of and reflections on the literature. Health, Risk & Society, 20, 297–311.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, T. L., Yu, C. T., Martin, G. L. and Fazzio, D. 2006. On choice, preference, and preference for choice. The Behavior Analyst Today, 7, 234–241.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Parsons, M. B. and Reid, D. H. 1990. Assessing food preferences among persons with profound mental retardation: Providing opportunities to make choices. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 23, 183–195.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petscher, E. S., Rey, C. and Bailey, J. S. 2009. A review of empirical support for differential reinforcement of alternative behavior. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 30, 409–425.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rajaraman, A. and Hanley, G. P. 2021. Mand compliance as a contingency controlling problem behavior: A systematic review. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 54, 103–121.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rajaraman, A., Austin, J. L., Gover, H. C., Cammilleri, A. P., Donnelly, D. R. and Hanley, G. P. 2022. Toward trauma‐informed applications of behavior analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 55, 40–61.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rajaraman, A., Hanley, G. P., Gover, H. C., Staubitz, J. L., Staubitz, J. E., Simcoe, K. M. and Metras, R. 2022. Minimizing escalation by treating dangerous problem behavior within an enhanced choice model. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 15, 219–242.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reid, D. H. and Parsons, M. B. 1991. Making choice a routine part of mealtimes for persons with profound mental retardation. Behavioral Interventions, 6, 249–261.
   Google Scholar
• Schloss, P. J., Alper, S. and Jayne, D. 1993. Self-determination for persons with disabilities: Choice, risk, and dignity. Exceptional Children, 60, 215–225.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shogren, K. A., Faggella-Luby, M. N., Bae, S. J. and Wehmeyer, M. L. 2004. The effect of choice-making as an intervention for problem behavior: A meta-analysis. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 6, 228–237.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slaton, J. D. and Hanley, G. P. 2016. Effects of multiple versus chained schedules on stereotypy and item engagement. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 49, 927–946.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stasolla, F., Caffò, A. O., Picucci, L. and Bosco, A. 2013. Assistive technology for promoting choice behaviors in three children with cerebral palsy and severe communication impairments. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 34, 2694–2700.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tessing, J. L., Napolitano, D. A., McAdam, D. B., DiCesare, A. and Axelrod, S. 2006. The effects of providing access to stimuli following choice making during vocal preference assessments. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 39, 501–506.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The Arc. n.d. Civil Rights: Overview. https://thearc.org/policy-advocacy/civil-rights/
   Google Scholar
• Thompson, R. H., Fisher, W. W. and Contrucci, S. A. 1998. Evaluating the reinforcing effects of choice in comparison to reinforcement rate. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 19, 181–187.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tullis, C. A., Cannella-Malone, H. I., Basbigill, A. R., Yeager, A., Fleming, C. V., Payne, D. and Wu, P. F. 2011. Review of the choice and preference assessment literature for individuals with severe to profound disabilities. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 46, 576–595. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24232368
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verriden, A. L. and Roscoe, E. M. 2016. A comparison of preference‐assessment methods. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 49, 265–285.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wehmeyer, M. L., Baker, D. J., Blumberg, R. and Harrison, R. 2004. Self-determination and student involvement in functional assessment: Innovative practices. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 6, 29–35.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilder, D. A., Wilson, P., Ellsworth, C. and Heering, P. W. 2003. A comparison of verbal and tangible stimulus preference assessment methods in adults with schizophrenia. Behavioral Interventions, 18, 191–198.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wrong Planet Forums. 2015. https://wrongplanet.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=288210
   Google Scholar