Building Functional Curricula for Students With Severe Intellectual Disabilities and Severe Problem Behaviors

  • Robert H. Horner
  • Jeffery R. Sprague
  • K. Brigid Flannery
Chapter
Part of the Applied Clinical Psychology book series (NSSB)

Abstract

People with severe intellectual disabilities who engage in dangerous behaviors present a major challenge. When building support plans (e.g., IEPs, IHPs) for these individuals, the severity of their harmful behaviors often overshadows all other support objectives. Recently, however, leaders in the field have encouraged a reevaluation of our strategies for delivering support (Touchette, 1989a; Wacker, 1989). We are encouraged to use functional analysis assessment procedures more prescriptively (Carr, Taylor, Carlson, & Robinson, 1989; Donnellan, LaVigna, Negri-Shoultz, & Fassbender, 1989; Durand & Crimmins, 1987; Favell, 1990; Iwata, Dorsey, Slifer, Bauman, & Richman, 1982; Mace et al., 1988; Meyer & Evans, 1989; Van Houten et al., 1988; Wacker et al., 1990) and to apply our technology of instruction in an effort to teach appropriate behaviors that achieve the behavioral function of the dangerous behaviors (Bailey & Pyles, 1989; Carr, 1988; Carr, Robinson, & Palumbo, 1990; Durand, 1990; Horner & Billingsley, 1988). This effort reflects a return to the roots of applied behavior analysis (Baer, Wolf, & Risley, 1968, 1987) and emphasizes that the content of instruction is an important concern for the reduction of problem behaviors. We are moving into an era in which durable, generalized behavior change is the standard for success, and where instructional technology will be viewed as among the most powerful approaches for reducing severe problem behavior.

Keywords

Developmental Disability Behavior Analysis Severe Handicap Curriculum Development Apply Behavior Analysis 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alberto, P, & Troutman, A. (1990). Applied behavior analysis for teachers: Influencing student performance (3rd ed.). Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill.Google Scholar
  2. Albin, R. W., O’Brien, M., & Horner, R. H. (1990). A case study analysis of an escalating sequence of problem behaviors. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  3. Baer, D. M. (1982). The imposition of structure on behavior and the demolition of behavioral structures. In D. J. Bernstein (Ed.), Response structure and organization: 1981 Nebraska symposium on motivation (pp. 217-254).Google Scholar
  4. Baer, D. M. (1991). The future of applied behavior analysis for people with severe disabilities: Commentary II. In L. Meyer, C. Peck, & L. Brown (Eds.), Critical issues in the lives of people with severe disabilities (pp. 613–615). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
  5. Baer, D. M. & Wolf, M. M. (1970). The entry into natural communities of reinforcement. In R. Ulrich, T. Stachnik, & J. Mabry (Eds.), Control of human behavior (pp. 319–324). Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.Google Scholar
  6. Baer, D. M., Wolf, M. M., & Risley, T. R. (1968). Some current dimensions of applied behavior analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1, 91–97.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Baer, D. M., Wolf, M. M., & Risley, T. R. (1987). Some still current dimensions of applied behavior analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 20, 313–327.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Bailey, J. S., & Pyles, D. A. M. (1989). Behavioral diagnostics. In E. Cipani (Ed.), The treatment of severe behavior disorders: Behavior analysis approaches (pp. 85–107). Washington, DC: American Association of Mental Retardation.Google Scholar
  9. Barlow, E., & Hersen, M. (1984). Single case experimental designs: Strategies for studying behavior change. New York: Pergamon.Google Scholar
  10. Bellamy, G. T., Newton, J. S., LeBaron, N., & Horner, R. H. (1990). Quality of life and lifestyle outcomes: A challenge for residential programs. In R. L. Schalock (Ed.), Quality of life: Perspectives and issues (pp. 127–137). Washington, DC: American Association on Mental Deficiency.Google Scholar
  11. Berkman, K. A., & Meyer, L. H. (1988). Alternative strategies and multiple outcomes in the remediation of severe self-injury: Going all out nonaversively. Journal of the Association for Persons With Severe Handicaps, 13, 76–86.Google Scholar
  12. Bijou, S. W, & Baer, D. M. (1961). Child development I: A systematic and empirical theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  13. Brown, L., Branston, M. B., Baumgart, D., Vincent, L., Falvey, M., & Schroeder, J. (1979). Using the characteristics of current and subsequent least restrictive environments as factors in the development of curricular content for severely handicapped students. Journal of the Association for Persons With Severe Handicaps, 4, 407–424.Google Scholar
  14. Brown, L., Branston, M. B., Hamre-Neitupski, S., Pumpian, I., Certo, N., & Greunwald, L. A. (1979). A strategy for developing chronological age appropriate and functional curricular content for severely handicapped adolescents and young adults. Journal of Special Education, 13, 81–90.Google Scholar
  15. Brown, L., Neitupski, J., & Hamre-Neitupski, S. (1976). The criterion of ultimate functioning. In M. A. Thomas (Ed.), Hey, don’t forget about me. Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.Google Scholar
  16. Brusca, R. M., Nieminen, G. S., Carter, R., & Repp, A. C. (1989). The relationship of staff contact and activity to the stereotypy of children with multiple disabilities. Journal of the Association for Persons With Severe Handicaps, 14, 127–136.Google Scholar
  17. Calkins, C. E, & Walker, H. M. (1990). Social competence for workers with developmental disabilities. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
  18. Carr, E. G. (1988). Functional equivalence as a means of response generalization. In R. H. Horner, G. Dunlap, & R. L. Koegel (Eds.), Generalization and maintenance: Life-style changes in applied settings (pp. 221–241). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
  19. Carr, E. G., & Durand, V. M. (1985a). Reducing behavior problems through functional communication training. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 18, 111–126.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Carr, E. G., & Durand, V. M. (1985b). The social-communicative basis of severe behavior problems in children. In S. Reiss & R. Bootzin (Eds.), Theoretical issues in behavior therapy (pp. 219–254). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  21. Carr, E.G., Robinson, S., & Palumbo, L. W. (1990). The wrong issue: Aversive versus nonaversive treatment. The right issue: Functional versus nonfunctional treatment. In A. Repp & N. Singh (Eds.), Perspectives on the use of nonaversive and aversive interventions for persons with developmental disabilities (pp 361–379). DeKalb, IL: Sycamore.Google Scholar
  22. Carr, E. G., Taylor, J. C., Carlson, J. I., & Robinson, S. (1989). Reinforcement and stimulus-based treatments for severe behavior problems in developmental disabilities. In U. S. Department of Health and Human Services Treatment of destructive behaviors in persons with developmental disabilities (pp. 173–229). Washington, DC: National Institutes of Health.Google Scholar
  23. Cataldo, M. F. (1989). The effects of punishment and other behavior reducing procedures on the destructive behaviors of persons with developmental disabilities. In Treatment of destructive behaviors in persons with developmental disabilities. Washington, DC: National Institutes of Health.Google Scholar
  24. Cataldo, M. F., Ward, E. M., Russo, D. C., Riordan, M., & Bennett, D. (1986). Compliance and correlated behavior in children: Effects of contingent and noncontingent reinforcement. Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 6, 264–282.Google Scholar
  25. Colvin, G., & Sugai, G. (1989). Managing escalating behavior. Eugene, OR: Behavior Associates.Google Scholar
  26. Day, M., & Horner, R. H. (1990, March). Response efficiency and deceleration of problem behaviors via functional equivalence training. Presentation at the 1990 Northern California Association for Behavior Analysis, San Francisco, CA.Google Scholar
  27. Donnellan, A., LaVigna, G. W., Negri-Shoultz, N. & Fassbender, L. L. (1989). Progress without punishment: Effective approaches for learners with behavior problems. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  28. Dunlap, G. (1984). The influence of task variation and maintenance tasks on the learning and affect of autistic children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 37, 41–64.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Dunlap, G., & Koegel, R. L. (1980). Motivating autistic children through stimulus variation. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 13, 619–627.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Dunlap, G., & Plienis, A. L. (1988). Generalization and maintenance of unsupervised responding via remote contingencies. In R. H. Horner, G. Dunlap, & R. L. Koegel (Eds.), Generalization and maintenance: Lifestyle changes in applied settings. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
  31. Durand, V. M. (1984). Attention-getting problem behavior: Analysis and intervention. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, State University of New York, Stony Brook.Google Scholar
  32. Durand, V M. (1987). Look homeward angel: A call to return to our functional roots. Behavior Analyst, 10, 299–302.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Durand, V. M. (1988). Functional reinforcer assessment: II. An evaluation of multiple influences. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  34. Durand, V. M. (1990). Severe behavior problems: A functional communication training approach. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  35. Durand, V. M., & Carr, E.G. (1987). Social influences on self-stimulatory behavior: Analysis and treatment application. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 20, 119–132.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Durand, V M., & Crimmins, D. B. (1987). Assessment and treatment of psychotic speech in an autistic child. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 17, 17–28.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Durand, V M., Crimmins, D. B., Caulfield, M., & Taylor, J. (1989). Reinforcer assessment: I. Using problem behavior to select reinforcers. Journal of the Association for Persons With Severe Handicaps, 14, 113–126.Google Scholar
  38. Dyer, K., Dunlap, G., & Winterling, V. (1990). The effects of choice-making on the problem behaviors of students with severe handicaps. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 23, 515–524.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Emerson, E. B. (1985). Evaluating the impact of deinstitutionalization in the lives of mentally retarded people. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 90, 277–288.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Engelmann, S., & Carnine, D. (1982). Theory of instruction: Principles and applications. New York: Irvington.Google Scholar
  41. Engelmann, S., & Colvin, G. (1983). Generalized compliance training: A direct-instruction program for managing severe behavior problems. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.Google Scholar
  42. Evans, I. M., & Meyer, L. H. (1987). Moving to educational validity: A reply to Test, Spooner, and Cooke. Journal of the Association for Persons With Severe Handicaps, 12, 103–106.Google Scholar
  43. Falvey, M. A. (1986). Community based curriculum. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
  44. Favell, J. E. (1990). Issues in the use of nonaversive and aversive interventions. In S. L. Harris & J. S. Hendleman (Eds.), Life-threatening behavior: Aversive versus nonaversive intervention (pp. 36–56). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Favell, J. E., & Reid, D. H. (1988). Generalizing and maintaining improvement in problem behavior. In R. H. Horner, G. Dunlap, & R. L. Koegel (Eds.), Generalization and maintenance: Life-style changes in applied settings (pp. 171–196). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
  46. Ferguson, D, & Wilcox, B. (1987). The elementary/secondary system: Supportive education for students with severe handicaps. Module 1: The activity-based IEP. Eugene: Specialized Training Program, University of Oregon.Google Scholar
  47. Ford, A., Schnorr, R., Meyer, L., Davern, L., Black, M. S., & Dempsey, P. (Eds.). (1989). The Syracuse community-referenced curriculum guide for students with moderate and severe disabilities. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
  48. Gardner, W. I., Cole, C. L., Davidson, D. P., & Karan, O. C. (1986). Reducing aggression in individuals with developmental disabilities: An expanded stimulus control, assessment, and intervention model. Education and Training of the Mentally Retarded, 21, 3–12.Google Scholar
  49. Gilbert, T. F. (1978). Human competence: Engineering worthy performance. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  50. Guess, D., & Helmstetter, E. (1986). Skill cluster instruction and the individualized curriculum sequencing model. In R. H. Horner, L. H. Meyer, & H. D. Fredericks (Eds.), Education of learners with severe handicaps (pp. 221–248). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
  51. Guess, D., Helmstetter, E., Turnbull, H. R., & Knowlton, S. (1986). Use of aversive procedures with persons who are disabled: An historical review and critical analysis. Seattle: Association for Persons With Severe Handicaps.Google Scholar
  52. Haring, N. G., & Bricker, D. (1976). Overview of comprehensive services for the severely profoundly handicapped. In N. G. Haring & L. J. Brown (Eds.), Teaching the severely handicapped, vol. 1 (pp. 2–16). New York: Grune & Stratton.Google Scholar
  53. Haring, T. G., & Lovinger, L. (1989). Promoting social interaction through teaching generalized play initiation responses to preschool children with autism. Journal of the Association for Persons With Severe Handicaps, 14, 58–67.Google Scholar
  54. Horner, R. D. (1980). The effects of an environment “enrichment” program on the behavior of institutionalized profoundly retarded children. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 13, 473–491.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Horner, R. H. (1990). Ideology, technology and typical community settings: The use of severe aversive stimuli. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 95(2), 166–168.Google Scholar
  56. Horner, R. H. (1991). The future of applied behavior analysis for people with severe disabilities: Commentary I. In L. Meyer, C. Peck, & L. Brown (Eds.), Critical issues in the lives of people with severe disabilities (pp 607–611). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
  57. Horner, R. H., Bellamy, G. T., & Colvin, G. T. (1984). Responding in the presence of nontrained stimuli: Implications of generalization error patterns. Journal of the Association for Persons With Severe Handicaps, 9, 287–296.Google Scholar
  58. Horner, R. H., & Billingsley, F. F. (1988). The effect of competing behavior on the generalization and maintenance of adaptive behavior in applied settings. In R. H. Horner, G. Dunlap, & R. L. Koegel (Eds.), Generalization and maintenance: Life-style changes in applied settings (pp. 197–220). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
  59. Horner, R. H., & Budd, C. M. (1985). Teaching manual sign language to a nonverbal student: Generalization of sign use and collateral reduction of maladaptive behavior. Education and Training of the Mentally Retarded, 20, 39–47.Google Scholar
  60. Horner, R. H., Day, M., Sprague, J. R., O’Brien, M., & Heathfield, L. T. (1991). Interspersed requests: A nonaversive procedure for decreasing aggression and self-injury during instruction. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 24(2), 265–278.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Horner, R. H., Dunlap, G., & Koegel, R. L. (1988). Generalization and maintenance: Life-style changes in applied settings. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
  62. Horner, R. H., Sprague, J. R., O’Brien, M., & Heathfield, L. T. (1990). The role of response efficiency in the reduction of problem behaviors through functional equivalence training: A case study. Journal of the Association for Persons With Severe Handicaps, 15(2), 91–97.Google Scholar
  63. Iwata, B. A. (1989, May). Discussant comments. In D. Wacker (Chair), Functional analysis of severe problem behaviors: Recent applications and novel approaches. Symposium presented at the 5th annual conference of the Association for Behavior Analysis, Milwaukee, WI.Google Scholar
  64. Iwata, B. A., Dorsey, M. F., Slifer, K. J., Bauman, K. E., & Richman, G. S. (1982). Toward a functional analysis of self-injury. Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 2, 3–20.Google Scholar
  65. Iwata, B. A., Pace, G. M., Kalsher, M. J., Cowdery, G. E., & Cataldo, M. F. (1990). Experimental analysis and extinction of self-injurious escape behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 23, 11–27.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. Iwata, B. A., Wong, S. E., Reardon, M. M., Dorsey, M. E, & Lau, M. M. (1982). Assessment and training of clinical interviewing skills: Analogue analysis and field replication. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 15, 191–204.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. Johnston, J. M., & Pennypacker, H. S. (1980). Strategies and tactics of human behavioral research. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  68. Kantor, J. R. (1959). Interbehavioral psychology. Granville, OH: Principia.Google Scholar
  69. Kazdin, A. E. (1977). Assessing the clinical or implied importance of behavior change through social validation. Behavior Modification, 1, 427–452.Google Scholar
  70. Kazdin, A. E. (1980). Behavior modification in applied settings (2nd ed.). Homewood, IL: Dorsey.Google Scholar
  71. Koegel, R. L. & Koegel, L. (1988). Generalized responsivity and pivotal behaviors. In R. H. Horner, G. Dunlap, & R. L. Koegel (Eds.), Generalization and maintenance: Life-style changes in applied settings, (pp. 41–66). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
  72. Landesman, S. (1986). Quality of life and personal life satisfaction: Definition and measurement issues. Mental Retardation, 24, 141–143.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. LaVigna, G. W., & Donnellan, A. M. (1986). Alternatives to punishment: Solving behavior? problems with nonaversive strategies. New York: Irvington.Google Scholar
  74. Lazar, J. B., & Rucker, W. L. (1984, November). The effectiveness of manipulating setting factors on the ruminative behavior of a boy with profound retardation. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Association for Persons With Severe Handicaps, Chicago.Google Scholar
  75. Leigland, S. (1984). On “setting events” and related concepts. Behavior Analyst, 7, 41–45.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. Lennox, D. B., & Miltenberger, R. G. (1989). Conducting a functional assessment of problem behavior in applied settings. Journal of the Association for Persons With Severe Handicaps, 14, 304–311.Google Scholar
  77. Lovaas, O. I. (1987). Behavioral treatment and normal educational and intellectual functioning in young autistic children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 55, 3–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. Mace, E C., Hock, M. L., Lalli, J. S., West, B. J., Belfiore, P., Pinter, E., & Brown, D. F. (1988). Behavioral momentum in the treatment of noncompliance. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 21, 123–141.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. Matson, J. L., & Taras, M.E. (1989). A 20 year review of punishment and alternative methods to treat problem behaviors in developmentally delayed persons. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 10, 85–104.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. McDonnell, J. J., & Horner, R. H. (1985). Effects of in vivo versus simulation-plus-in vivo training on the acquisition and generalization of grocery item selection by high school students with severe handicaps. Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 5, 323–343.Google Scholar
  81. Meyer, L. M. (1987). Program quality indicators (POI): A checklist of most promising practices in educational programs for students with severe disabilities. Seattle, WA: Association for Persons With Severe Handicaps.Google Scholar
  82. Meyer, L. M., & Evans, I. M. (1989). Nonaversive intervention for behavior problems: A manual for home and community. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
  83. Michael, J. L. (1982). Distinguishing between discriminative and motivational functions of stimuli. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 37, 149–155.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  84. Miltenberger, R. G., & Fuqua, R. W. (1985). Evaluation of a training manual for the acquisition of behavioral assessment interviewing skills. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 18, 323–328.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  85. Miltenberger, R. G., & Veltum, L. (1988). Evaluation of an instructions and modeling procedure for training behavioral assessment interviewing. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 19, 31–41.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. Neef, N. A., Iwata, B. A., & Page, T. J. (1980). The effects of interspersal training versus high density reinforcement on spelling acquisition and retention. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 13, 153–158.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  87. Neel, R. S., & Billingsley, F. F. (1989). Impact: A functional curriculum handbook for students with moderate to severe disabilities. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
  88. Newton, J. S., Bellamy, G. T., Horner, R. H., Boles, S. M., LeBaron, N. M., & Bennett, A. (1987). Using the Activities Catalog in residential programs for individuals with severe disabilities. In B. Wilcox & G. T. Bellamy, A comprehensive guide to the Activities Catalog: An alternative curriculum for youth and adults with severe disabilities (pp. 125–149). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
  89. O’Brien, J. (1987). A guide to lifestyle planning: Using the Activities Catalog to integrate services and natural support systems. In B. Wilcox and G. T. Bellamy (Eds.), A comprehensive guide to the Activities Catalog: (pp. 175–189). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
  90. O’Neill, R. E., Horner, R. H., Albin, R. W., Storey, K., & Sprague, J. R. (1990). Functional analysis: A practical assessment guide. Sycamore, IL: Sycamore.Google Scholar
  91. Patterson, G. R. (1982). Coercive family process. Eugene, OR: Castalia.Google Scholar
  92. Repp, A. C., Felce, D., & Barton, L. E. (1988). Basing the treatment of Stereotypic and self-injurious behaviors on hypotheses of their causes. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 21, 281–289.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  93. Repp, A. C., Singh, N. N., Olinger, E., & Olsen, D. (1990). A review of the use of functional analysis to test causes of self-injurious behavior: Rationale, current status, and future directions. Journal of Mental Deficiency Research, 34, 95–105.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  94. Romanczyk, R. G. (1989). Self-injurious behavior: Etiology and treatment. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
  95. Sailor, W., Anderson, J. L., Halvorsen, A. T., Doering, K., Filler, J., & Goetz, L. (1989). The comprehensive local school: Regular education for all students with disabilities. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
  96. Sasso, G. M., & Reimers, T. M. (1988). Assessing the functional properties of behavior: Implications and applications for the classroom. Focus on Autistic Behavior, 3, 1–15.Google Scholar
  97. Schalock, R. L., & Harper, R. S. (1982). Skill acquisition and client movement indices: Implementing cost-effective analysis in rehabilitation programs. Evaluation and Program Planning, 5, 223–231.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  98. Schiefelbusch, R. L. (1978). Bases of language intervention. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
  99. Schroeder, S. R., Kanoy, J. R., Mulick, J. A., Rojahn, J., Thios, S. J., Stephens, M., & Hawk, B. (1982). The effects of the environment on programs for self-injurious behavior. In J. H. Hollis & C. E. Meyers (Eds.), Life threatening behavior: Analysis and intervention (pp. 105–159). Washington, DC: American Association on Mental Deficiency.Google Scholar
  100. Singer, G. H. S., Singer, J., & Horner, R. H. (1987). Using pretask requests to increase the probability of compliance for students with severe disabilities. Journal of the Association for Persons With Severe Handicaps, 12, 287–291.Google Scholar
  101. Snell, M. E. (Ed.). (1987). Systematic instruction of persons with severe handicaps. Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill.Google Scholar
  102. Sprague, J. R., & Horner, R. H. (1991). Determining the acceptability of behavior support plans. In M. Wang, H. Wahlberg, & M. Reynolds (Eds.), Handbook of special education (pp. 125–142). Oxford, London: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
  103. Stokes, T. F., & Baer, D. M. (1977). An implicit technology of generalization. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 10, 349–367.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  104. Storey, K., Stern, R., & Parker, R. (1990). A comparison of attitudes towards typical recreational activities versus the Special Olympics. Education and Training in Mental Retardation 25(1), 94–99.Google Scholar
  105. Sulzer, B., & Mayer, G. R. (1972). Behavior modification procedures for school personnel. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
  106. Touchette, P. E. (1989a) Humane, permanent elimination of destructive behavior via analysis and manipulation of stimulus control. In U. S. Department of Health and Human Services Treatment of destructive behaviors in persons with developmental disabilities (pp. 73–75). Washington, DC: National Institutes of Health.Google Scholar
  107. Touchette, P. E. (1989b). A stimulus control model for the elimination of severe maladaptive behavior. Paper presented at the NIDRR National Conference on Data-Based Strategies for Behavior Management in Community Settings, Santa Barbara, CA.Google Scholar
  108. Touchette, P. E., MacDonald, R. E, & Langer, S. N. (1985). A scatter plot for identifying stimulus control of problem behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 18, 343–351.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  109. Turnbull, H. R., Guess, D., Backus, L. M., Barber, P. A., Fiedler, C. R., Helmstetter, E., & Summers, J. A. (1986). A model for analyzing the moral aspects of special education and behavioral interventions: The moral aspects of aversive procedures. In P. R. Dokecki & R. M. Zaner (Eds.), Ethics of dealing with persons with severe handicaps (pp. 167–210). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
  110. Van Houten, R., Axelrod, S., Bailey, J. S., Favell, J. E., Foxx, R. ML, Iwata, B. A., & Lovaas, O. I. (1988). The right to effective behavioral treatment. Behavior Analyst, 11(2), 111–114.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  111. Voeltz, L. M., & Evans, I. M. (1983). Educational validity: Procedures to evaluate outcomes in programs for severely handicapped learners. Journal of the Association of the Severely Handicapped, 8(1), 3–15.Google Scholar
  112. Wacker, D. P. (1989). Further evaluation of functional communication training: An analysis of active treatment components. In U. S. Department of Health and Human Services Treatment of destructive behaviors in persons with developmental disabilities (pp. 70–72). Washington, DC: National Institutes of Health.Google Scholar
  113. Wacker, D. P., Steege, M. W., Northup, J., Sasso, G., Berg, W., Reimers, T., Cooper, L., Cigrand, K., & Donn, L. (1990). A component analysis of functional communication training across three topographies of severe behavior problems. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 23, 417–429.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  114. Wahler, R. G., & Fox, J. J. (1981). Setting events in applied behavior analysis: Toward a conceptual and methodological expansion. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 14, 327–338.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  115. Wilcox, B. W, & Bellamy, G. T. (1982). Design of high school programs for students with severe handicaps. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
  116. Wilcox, B. W, & Bellamy, G. T. (1987). A comprehensive guide to the activities catalog. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
  117. Willis, T. J., LaVigna, G. W, & Donnellan, A. M. (1989). Behavior assessment guide. Los Angeles: Institute for Applied Behavior Analysis.Google Scholar
  118. Winterling, V, Dunlap, G., & O’Neill, R. (1987). The influence of task variation on the aberrant behavior of autistic students. Education and Treatment of Children, 10, 105–119.Google Scholar
  119. Wolery, M., Bailey, D. B., & Sugai, G. M. (1988). Structuring the environment for effective teaching. In M. Wolery, D. B. Bailey, & G. M. Sugai Effective teaching: Principles and procedures of applied behavior analysis with exceptional students, (pp. 187–213). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  120. Wolf, M. M. (1978). Social validity: The case for subjective measurement, or how applied behavior analysis is finding its heart. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 11, 203–214.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robert H. Horner
    • 1
  • Jeffery R. Sprague
    • 1
  • K. Brigid Flannery
    • 1
  1. 1.College of EducationUniversity of OregonEugeneUSA

Personalised recommendations