Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T14:24:42.181Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Visual Screening versus Auditory Screening: An Alternating Treatments Design

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 October 2014

Gerard Dolan
Gerard Dolan*
Affiliation:
University of Waikato
*
Department of Psychology, University of Waikato, Private Bag, Hamilton, New Zealand
Get access

Abstract

An alternating treatment design was used to measure the differing impact of visual screening and an auditory blocking procedure in the suppression of the screaming behaviour of a profoundly retarded girl. The auditory blocking procedure made use of white noise to mask any background or personal sounds. During separate sessions both screening procedures were applied for a duration of 1 minute following an occurrence of the screaming behaviour. Results showed that both techniques were successful in reducing the frequency of the behaviour. The visual screening procedure was the preferred treatment for maintaining and generalizing the suppression, because of ease of use and mobility.

Type
Research Article
Information
Behaviour Change , Volume 4 , Issue 4 , December 1987 , pp. 36 - 39
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 1987

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Barlow, D. H., & Hayes, S. C. (1979). Alternating treatments design: One strategy for comparing the effects of two treatments in a single subject. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 12, 199–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barmann, B. C., & Murray, W. J. (1981). Suppression of inappropriate sexual behavior by facial screening. Behavior Therapy, 12, 199–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Demetral, G. D., & Lutzker, J. R. (1980). The parameters of facial screening in treating self-injurious behavior. Behavior Research of Severe Developmental Disabilities, 1, 261–277.Google Scholar
Grossman, H. D. (1983). Manual on terminology and classification in mental retardation. Washington, D.C.: American Association on Mental Deficency.Google Scholar
McGonigle, J. J., Duncan, D. V., Cordisco, L., & Barrett, R. P. (1982). Visual screening: An alternative method for reducing stereotypic behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 15, 461–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mulick, S. A., & Schroeder, S. R. (1980). Research relating to management of antisocial behaviour in mentally retarded persons. Psychological Record, 30, 397–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singh, N. N.. Beale, I. L., & Dawson, M. J. (1981). Duration of facial screening and suppression of self-injurious behavior: Analysis using an alternating treatments design. Behavioral Assessment, 3, 411–420.Google Scholar
Singh, N. N., Winton, A. S., & Dawson, M. J. (1982). Suppression of antisocial behaviour by facial screening using multiple baseline and alternating treatments designs. Behavior Therapy, 13, 511–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winton, A. S., Singh, N. N., & Dawson, M. J. (1984). Effects of facial screening and blindfold on self-injurous behaviour. Applied Research in Mental Retardation, 3, 29–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zegiob, L. E., Jenkins, J., Becker, S., & Bristow, A. (1976). Facial screening: Effects on appropriate and inappropriate behaviours. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 7, 355–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar