We evaluated the effects of choice versus the assignment of tasks of varying preferences on the work engagement of adults with severe disabilities. The combined results of two experiments suggest that the relative preference for a task may be an important variable in the effectiveness of choice for some individuals.DESCRIPTORS: choice, preference, severe disabilities, work performanceOne benefit of choice making for adults with severe disabilities is increased work engagement (Parsons, Reid, Reynolds, & Bumgarner, 1990). However, the role of "choosing" relative to obtaining a preferred outcome is unclear. Understanding the variables that affect the benefits of choice making is important if we are to maximize choice-making strategies for persons with limited expression. In Experiment 1, we attempted to replicate the results of Parsons et al. (1990) regarding the effects of task assignment versus choice on time on task when task preferences varied. In Experiment 2, we examined the effects of choice on work performance when task preferences were held constant.METHOD: In Experiment 1, 3 adults with severe or profound mental retardation participated. Observations were conducted in either a mailroom enclave or a segregated training center during the typical work routine. Each condition lasted 15 min. On-task behavior (see Parsons et al., 1990) was recorded using a 15-s momentary time-sampling procedure.Procedures were similar to those of Parsons et al. (1990). The participants' relative preference for five familiar work tasks (stamping, stuffing envelopes, stuffing folders, labeling, sealing envelopes) was determined by Mithaug and Hanawalt's (1978) pair-wise assessment. One high-preference task (i.e., one that was selected on at least 75% of the pairings) and one low-preference task (i.e., one that was selected on no more than 25% of the pairings) were identified for each participant. The effects of the following three conditions were evaluated using a multielement design, counterbalanced across sessions: (a) assignment of a high-preference task, (b) assignment of a low-preference task, and (c) choice between the high-and low-preference tasks.In Experiment 2, 5 adults participated, including the 3 from Experiment 1. Settings, tasks, observations, and procedures were the same as in Experiment 1, with the exception of task preference. The participants' preferences for the tasks were evaluated (or reevaluated if they had participated in Experiment 1) using the same assessment strategy. Two tasks within the categories of low-preference or moderate-preference (selected from 26% to 74% of the pairings) tasks were then selected for each participant. Using tasks of similar preference allowed us to evaluate choice independent from obtaining a preferred outcome.The effects of choice (between tasks of the same preference category) and no choice (assignment of one of the tasks) on on-task behavior were evaluated using a multielement design counterbalanced across sessions. Interobserver agreement, calculated on an interval-by-int...

How teams implement and understand the process of positive behavior support provides an important source of information for improving supports for adults with developmental disabilities who engage in severe challenging behaviors in community settings. The purpose of the present study was to describe how positive behavior support was experienced and understood by team members from four residential, community-based teams who achieved positive outcomes for adults with severe challenging behaviors. In-depth, semistructured interviewing was the primary data source involving 19 participants. Data were analyzed within and across teams revealing team members' perceptions on their guiding values, struggles and barriers to implementing positive approaches, ways to support team members, the importance of staff relationships, and key elements of their direct support. Moving beyond techniques, the findings depict an overall culture of support consisting of interrelated layers of social context. Implications for practice and future research directions are discussed.DESCRIPTORS: positive behavior support, team process, residential supports, adults with developmental disabilities, challenging behaviors Positive approaches 1 or positive behavior support refers to a comprehensive, value-based approach toward the support of individuals with developmental disabilities who engage in severe challenging behaviors. With roots both in applied behavior analysis and personcentered planning, positive behavior support has emerged over the last 15 years into a comprehensive support ecology consisting of multiple interventions derived from diverse theoretical and philosophical perspectives (Carr et al.

Enhancing self-determination is an ongoing process that involves the development of skills, interaction with the environment, and the support of others. In this report we translate the concepts of self-determination into action strategies for support providers who work with adults with severe disabilities. Specifically, this report (a) describes several barriers to self-determination, (b) describes ways to translate the four components of self-determination into practice, (c) provides an example of how support for self-determination was implemented for one woman, and (d) discusses some of the unresolved challenges in making self-determination a reality for adults with severe disabilities.

In this study, we evaluated the effect of individualized, embedded choice opportunities in daily routines on the task initiations and protests by one man with severe disabilities. An initial functional analysis conducted during Phase J revealed that low rates ofparticipation and high rates of protests in household activities were related to prompts that offered no control. Subsequently in Phase 2, we modified prompts within three different routines to provide greater control through choice. Within the context of an A-B-A-B design, the effects of a "traditional" no-choice versus choice task analysis were evaluated in each routine across three staff. The results demonstrated that when routines included opportunities for choice, task initiations were high, whereas protests, including severe aggression, were virtually eliminated. These results are discussed in relation to their implications for participant control, individualizing choice opportunities, embedding choice in daily routines, and the prevention of problem behaviors.