Acceptability of behavioral interventions for self-injurious behavior

Using a case description methodology, we examined the effects of behavior problem severity, intervention type (accelerative vs. reductive), client status (child vs. adult), and type of work setting (child vs. adult unit) on staff members' acceptability ratings of six behavioral interventions used to treat self-injurious behavior (SIB). Results indicated that (a) accelerative interventions were rated more acceptable than reductive treatments, (b) acceptability of treatments varied as a function of SIB severity, and (c) client status and type of work setting failed to significantly influence acceptability ratings. Findings were discussed in the context of the current controversy surrounding the use of aversive treatments. The implications of the results for the design of institutionally based behavioral intervention programs were examined.