Assessment & Research

Do individuals with intellectual disability select appropriate objects as landmarks when learning a new route?

Courbois et al. (2013) · Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR 2013
★ The Verdict

Adults with ID pick poor, moveable landmarks, so teach them to choose signs and text instead.

✓ Read this if BCBAs teaching community travel to teens or adults with ID.
✗ Skip if Clinicians who only run clinic-based verbal programs.

01Research in Context

01

What this study did

Perryman et al. (2013) watched the adults with intellectual disability pick landmarks on a new walking route.

They also watched the adults without disability walk the same route.

Everyone chose objects to remember turns; the team later checked which objects they picked.

02

What they found

The ID group picked more trash cans, bushes, and parked bikes.

They picked fewer street signs, shop names, and house numbers.

These items change or move, so they make poor landmarks.

03

How this fits with other research

Tanis et al. (2012) also tested adults with ID in the real world. They found the same group uses everyday tech less than peers. Both studies show adults with ID need extra cues to use stable, lasting tools.

Vassos et al. (2016) reviewed choice-making programs. Their review says people with ID can learn to make better daily choices when we teach the skill step-by-step. Perryman et al. (2013) gives one clear step: teach clients to pick permanent, text-based landmarks first.

Thompson et al. (2018) had adults with ID help run a study. They showed these adults can give useful input when we include them. Perryman et al. (2013) did not include co-researchers; future landmark work could ask adults with ID to help pick the best signs.

04

Why it matters

When you teach route travel, don’t let clients memorize bushes or parked cars. Point them to street signs, store names, and house numbers. Practice this choice aloud: “Will that trash can be here tomorrow?” In a few trials your learner can pick better cues and get lost less often.

Free CEUs

Want CEUs on This Topic?

The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.

Join Free →
→ Action — try this Monday

Walk the route with your learner, stop at each corner, and ask, “Is that sign always here?” Praise only permanent landmarks.

02At a glance

Intervention
not applicable
Design
quasi experimental
Population
intellectual disability, neurotypical
Finding
negative

03Original abstract

BACKGROUND: The present study was aimed at investigating the selection of landmarks by individuals with intellectual disability (ID). The hypothesis was that they would be less efficient than individuals without IDs in the selection of landmarks when learning a new route. METHODS: The experiment took place in a natural setting with a group of participants with ID and a group of control participants matched by chronological age. The participants were first guided along a route situated in an unfamiliar district. Then, they had to guide the experimenter along the route while pointing to all the objects and features they found useful for wayfinding. RESULTS: The designated objects were categorised as a function of their landmarks properties. There were significant differences between the two groups for non-permanent landmarks, distant landmarks and non-unique landmarks. The two groups selected landmarks near intersections in the same proportions. However, the individuals with ID selected more non-unique landmarks and less textual signage than the control group at these decision points. CONCLUSION: Individuals with ID seem to be less efficient than individuals without disability in landmark selection. This may limit their wayfinding abilities in their day-to-day travelling. This may also account for their difficulties in obtaining the kind of spatial knowledge which relates to the configural structure of their environment.

Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR, 2013 · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2788.2011.01518.x