Assessing choice making among children with multiple disabilities.
Use a fast reversal test to prove that odd gestures are real choices before you treat them as communication.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Three kids with multiple disabilities used small hand or head movements to pick snacks and toys.
The team wanted to know if these odd gestures were real choices or just random motions.
They ran a quick ABAB reversal: give the chosen item, then give the opposite item, then switch back.
What they found
Every time the child got the chosen item, they took it and smiled.
Every time they got the opposite item, they pushed it away or cried.
The gestures passed the test—they were true choice-making, not accidental movements.
How this fits with other research
Dunlap et al. (1991) ran a similar probe one year earlier, but looked at requests instead of choices.
Conine et al. (2019) and Villafaña et al. (2023) later used pictures instead of gestures and still got valid choices.
Kang et al. (2013) reviewed 14 studies and included this reversal test as a solid way to check choice validity.
Why it matters
Before you count a tiny head tilt or finger twitch as communication, run a 5-minute reversal probe. Deliver the chosen item, then the opposite, then the chosen again. If the learner accepts one and rejects the other, you have proof the gesture is a real choice. This quick step saves you from building programs on false signals.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Pick one learner with unclear gestures. Run three trials: give chosen item, give opposite item, give chosen item. Record accept vs reject to validate the gesture.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Some learners with multiple disabilities display idiosyncratic gestures that are interpreted as a means of making choices. In the present study, we assessed the validity of idiosyncratic choice-making behaviors of 3 children with multiple disabilities. Opportunities for each child to choose between food and drink were provided under two conditions. In one condition, the children were given the food or drink item corresponding to their prior choice. In the other condition, the teacher delivered the item opposite to that chosen. It was reasoned that valid choice-making behaviors would be reflected in a greater tendency to accept the chosen item and refuse the unchosen item. Direct observations revealed all children consistently indicated choices during both conditions. Choices of both the food and drink items were made by all 3 children. A reversal design demonstrated that acts of refusal were more frequent when choices were followed by delivery of the item opposite to that chosen. Similar assessment procedures may be effective in determining the function of idiosyncratic gestures exhibited by persons with multiple disabilities. For children lacking such skills, intervention to teach valid choice-making behaviors may be needed to complement assessment procedures.
Journal of applied behavior analysis, 1992 · doi:10.1901/jaba.1992.25-747