24
Amanda Ripley, MS BCBA Imagine! Behavioral Health Services Paula K. Davis, Ph.D. Southern Illinois University

Ripley 2011 Evaluation of Pref Formats

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

An aging presentation at the 37th Annual Association for Behavior Analysis International Conference in Denver, CO .

Citation preview

Page 1: Ripley 2011 Evaluation of Pref Formats

Amanda Ripley, MS BCBAImagine! Behavioral Health Services

Paula K. Davis, Ph.D.Southern Illinois University

Page 2: Ripley 2011 Evaluation of Pref Formats

2008: 38.7 million adults 65 and older

By 2050: 88.5 million adults 65 and older

By 2030: 1 in 5 Americans will be 80 and older

Page 3: Ripley 2011 Evaluation of Pref Formats

AD: cognitive disturbance and decline of memory

Current: 71 seconds

By 2050: 33 seconds

Make up 47% of residents of nursing home

Page 4: Ripley 2011 Evaluation of Pref Formats

ActivitiesChoice and Variety (Logsdon, 2000)Purposeful Activities (Basler, 2005)Ethical Obligations (Skinner, 1969)

Preference AssessmentsType (MSWO, paired-choice)Format (tangible, pictorial)Physical (reach, vision)

Page 5: Ripley 2011 Evaluation of Pref Formats

Compared Tangible and Pictorial Formats

Results: 5/7 did not show consistent preferences across the two formats

Conclusion: preference assessments are affected by presentation format

Page 6: Ripley 2011 Evaluation of Pref Formats

Compared choice formats to engagementPictorial, Tangible, Verbal, Textual

Results: tangible and verbal were predictive of engagement

Conclusion: implications for clinicians who need assessment that are quick and yield predictive results

Page 7: Ripley 2011 Evaluation of Pref Formats

Evaluate the consistency of preferences across presentation formatsEvaluate preferences between productive and leisure activities

Page 8: Ripley 2011 Evaluation of Pref Formats

3 Females76 to 88 years oldMMSE:11 to 20ADL dependentAll participants made a choice between pairs

Page 9: Ripley 2011 Evaluation of Pref Formats

12 activities were chosen from a list provided (Burket, 2008)

6 Leisure Activities6 Productive Activities

Page 10: Ripley 2011 Evaluation of Pref Formats

4 Preference Assessments were conducted:Informal (Questionnaire)

Tangible Paired-Choice

Verbal Paired-Choice

Single Stimulus Engagement

Page 11: Ripley 2011 Evaluation of Pref Formats

Each activity was asked 1 timeResponse Measurement:

Preferred: confirming statement (yes, sure)Not Preferred: declining statement (no, nope)

Page 12: Ripley 2011 Evaluation of Pref Formats

Verbal: Question onlyTangible: Question and Item Presented

1 minute contingent access to activityResponse Measurement:

Verbal: Participant said name of itemTangible: Participant said name of, approached, or touched item

Scheduled Breaks (every 20 minutes)

Page 13: Ripley 2011 Evaluation of Pref Formats

[activity] for up to 30 minutes while I do some

30 minute accessResponse Measurement:

Engaged: actively manipulating the item and/or looking at the materials without sleeping (i.e., shutting eyes for more than one second)

10s Whole Interval Recording

Page 14: Ripley 2011 Evaluation of Pref Formats

Taken 33% of SessionsTreatment Integrity: 100% for all sessionsInterobserver Agreement

Informal: 100%Verbal: 98% - 100% Tangible: 97% - 100%SSE: 98%-99%

Page 15: Ripley 2011 Evaluation of Pref Formats
Page 16: Ripley 2011 Evaluation of Pref Formats
Page 17: Ripley 2011 Evaluation of Pref Formats
Page 18: Ripley 2011 Evaluation of Pref Formats
Page 19: Ripley 2011 Evaluation of Pref Formats
Page 20: Ripley 2011 Evaluation of Pref Formats
Page 21: Ripley 2011 Evaluation of Pref Formats

Informal and systematic assessment not comparableSignificant correlation / similar hierarchies between tangible and verbal

No significant correlation for SSE and other assessments

Highest Engagement: first 10 minute blockPreferred both Leisure and Productive Activities

Page 22: Ripley 2011 Evaluation of Pref Formats

Choice and Variety are important

Length of Activities

Stimulus Control issues

Page 23: Ripley 2011 Evaluation of Pref Formats

Activities based upon previous life rolesEvaluate individualized activities vs. generic activities?

Attrition RatesWill other different types / formats avoid attrition rates?