Abstract
Findings from a randomized control design efficacy trial of an asset-based vs. needs-based approach to the response-contingent learning of infants and toddlers with significant developmental delays and disabilities who did not use instrumental behavior to produce or elicit reinforcing consequences are reported. The investigation included 71 children randomly assigned to the two contrasting types of interventions. The asset-based intervention and needs-based intervention differed in terms of how child behavior were identified and used to elicit reinforcing consequences as part of response-contingent learning games implemented by the children’s parents or other primary caregivers. Children in the asset-based group were provided more learning opportunities, acquired more response-contingent behavior, and demonstrated more efficient learning compared to children in the needs-based group. Implications for improving practices for very young children with significant developmental delays and multiple disabilities are described.
Highlights
Four decades ago, Maier (1978) defined intervention as “A series of socially engineered ... activities in which a practitioner deliberately introduces structured events into the experience of an individual or group of individuals ... in order to facilitate ordinary developmental processes” (p. 195)
Findings showed that the children in the asset-based group were afforded more learning opportunities and demonstrated more response-contingent learning, and the learning games resulted in more efficient child learning, compared to the children in the needs-based group
The results provide support for the four study hypotheses, and highlight the fact that the ways in which child behavior are identified, selected, and used as part of learning games to facilitate acquisition of response-contingent behavior matter a great deal in terms of child learning capacity and efficiency
Summary
Four decades ago, Maier (1978) defined intervention as “A series of socially engineered ... activities in which a practitioner deliberately introduces structured events into the experience of an individual or group of individuals ... in order to facilitate ordinary developmental processes” (p. 195). Whether stated explicitly or implicitly, all interventions are developed from different paradigms where different worldviews include different beliefs and presuppositions about the experiences hypothesized to be related to outcomes of interest (Reese & Overton, 1980). These beliefs and presuppositions in turn influence decisions about both research and practice (Hartung, 2015; Turner & Reese, 1980). Two contrasting paradigms have most often been used to conceptualize and operationalize early intervention practices with infants and toddlers with developmental delays and disabilities.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Journal of Educational and Developmental Psychology
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
