Acceptability and utilization of frequently-cited intervention strategies

Abstract

Acceptability ratings of three typesof interventions (behavioral, pragmatic, and humanistic) applied to two types of behavior problems (acting out vs. passive resistance) were evaluated by use to the Intervention Rating Profile (IRP-15) developed by Witt and Martens (1984). The relationships among acceptability scores of interventions and self-reported utilization of the three types of interventions also were evaluated. Student teachers (N = 73) read descriptions of two behavior problems and then rated each of three diffenet interventions in regard to perceived acceptability. Results indicated that both behavior problems were regarded as being equally severe; however, the acting out behavior problem was more likely to be referred for intevention outsie the clasroom. The ratings of the interventions indicated that the student teachers regarded the humanistic approach as being the most acceptable, the behavioral intervention as next in acceptability, and the pragmatic approach as least acceptable. Variations also were noted inregard to type to behavior problem exhinited and intervention type. There was not a significant discrepancy among the acceptability ratings of the three intervention types and student teachers's self-reported utilization of these three types of interventions.