New model of mapping difficulties in solving analogical problems among adolescents and adults with intellectual disability.
Tailored dynamic assessment that targets inference and mapping lifts analogical reasoning higher than standard DA in adolescents and adults with intellectual disability.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Lifshitz et al. (2011) built a new dynamic assessment for analogical problems.
The team worked with adolescents and adults who have mild to moderate intellectual disability.
They compared the new tailored version against a standard dynamic test to see who gained more.
What they found
The tailored model gave bigger pre-to-post jumps in analogical reasoning.
Adults with ID improved more than adolescents, showing age matters.
Standard dynamic testing helped, but the custom version helped more.
How this fits with other research
Barton et al. (2019) extends this work by adding kids with autism. Their group did not improve from simple comparison cues, unlike the ID adults here.
Leroy et al. (2014) seems to disagree: children with SLI got worse on mapping tasks. The clash fades once you see they tested different diagnoses and used linguistic items without pictures.
Mashal et al. (2011) used visual thinking maps and also saw medium gains in abstract language, matching the positive trend for visual scaffolds in ID.
Why it matters
If you assess reasoning in teens or adults with ID, add brief prompts that target inference and mapping.
Swap static tests for a short dynamic loop: prompt, observe, adjust, then score.
You may see faster gains in analogical tasks and clearer data for next-step goals.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Add one prompt that asks the learner to explain why two items go together, then give a hint and retest within the same trial.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
The main goal of the study was to map the difficulties and cognitive processes among adolescents (aged 13-21, N = 30) and adults (aged 25-66, N = 30) with mild and moderate intellectual disability (ID) when solving analogical problems. The participants were administered the Conceptual and Perceptual Analogical Modifiability test. A three-fold tailored dynamic assessment (DA) model for mapping difficulties was constructed based on Sternberg's analogical components model (encoding, inference, mapping, application): (a) mapping pre-teaching difficulties; (b) assessing the level of mediation; and (c) analyzing post-teaching responses. Another goal was to find out whether participants receiving "tailored" mediation would receive higher scores than participants receiving the standard DA procedure (adolescents aged 14-20; N = 30) and adults (25-55, N = 31). Repeated measures MANOVA of time × age × ID level indicated significant pre to post-teaching improvement across all age groups and ID levels. The adults gained more from mediation than the adolescents. The tailored DA model was more effective in producing change than the standard DA model. The greatest difficulties in the pre-teaching stage were in inference and mapping of perceptual analogies, where the participants received the highest level of mediation. Stepwise regression analysis indicated that inference, ID level and age predicted modifiability in the application of conceptual analogies, whereas encoding, ID level and mediation for inference predicted modifiability in the application of perceptual analogies.
Research in developmental disabilities, 2011 · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2010.10.010