Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Judgments of restrictiveness, social acceptability, and usage: review of research on procedures to decrease behavior.

R L Morgan1

  • 1Department of Special Education, Utah State University, Logan 84322-6500.

American Journal of Mental Retardation : AJMR
|September 1, 1989
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Response to: ROBINS-E risk of bias tool.

Environment international·2025
Same author

Protection against influenza hospitalizations from enhanced influenza vaccines among older adults: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Journal of the American Geriatrics Society·2024
Same author

Optical constants of far infrared materials. 2: crystalline solids.

Applied optics·2010
Same author

Creep behavior of bone cement: a method for time extrapolation using time-temperature equivalence.

Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine·2004
Same author

Cell death in the central nervous system: therapeutic possibilities?

Regional anesthesia and pain medicine·2000
Same author

MOC-31 aids in the differentiation between adenocarcinoma and reactive mesothelial cells.

Cancer·1999
Same journal

Peer interactions and academic engagement of youth with developmental disabilities in inclusive middle and high school classrooms.

American journal of mental retardation : AJMR·2009
Same journal

Gatekeepers of science: attitudes toward the research participation of adults with intellectual disability.

American journal of mental retardation : AJMR·2009
Same journal

Memory skills of boys with fragile X syndrome.

American journal of mental retardation : AJMR·2009
Same journal

Evidence for latent classes of IQ in young children with autism spectrum disorder.

American journal of mental retardation : AJMR·2009
Same journal

Autism profiles of males with fragile X syndrome.

American journal of mental retardation : AJMR·2009
Same journal

Functional analysis of the early development of self-injurious behavior: incorporating gene-environment interactions.

American journal of mental retardation : AJMR·2008
See all related articles

Professionals and consumers agree on behavior reduction procedure rankings, with more restrictive methods used less often and as a last resort. Social acceptability varies with context and procedure restrictiveness.

Area of Science:

  • Behavioral Psychology
  • Applied Behavior Analysis
  • Social Psychology

Background:

  • Understanding public and professional perceptions of behavior reduction procedures is crucial for ethical and effective practice.
  • Previous research has explored judgments regarding restrictiveness, social acceptability, and frequency of use for various interventions.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To review and synthesize findings on judgments of behavior reduction procedures.
  • To examine consistency in perceived restrictiveness and social acceptability.
  • To explore the relationship between restrictiveness, social acceptability, and actual use.

Main Methods:

  • Systematic review of existing research on judgments of behavior reduction procedures.
  • Analysis of respondent ratings on restrictiveness, social acceptability, and estimated frequency of use.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Examination of contextual factors influencing social acceptability.

    • Main Results:

    • Consistent agreement among respondents on the hierarchical ranking of procedures from least to most restrictive.
    • Consensus that more restrictive procedures should be reserved as a last resort.
    • Less restrictive procedures were perceived as more socially acceptable, and vice versa.
    • More restrictive procedures are infrequently used in practice.
    • Social acceptability is influenced by contextual variables.

    Conclusions:

    • There is general agreement on the hierarchy of behavior reduction procedures.
    • Ethical guidelines align with public and professional perceptions regarding the use of restrictive interventions.
    • Context plays a significant role in the social acceptability of behavior modification techniques.
    • Further research is needed to address methodological limitations and explore nuanced contextual influences.