Practical aspects of a visual aid to decision making.
A red-green bar card helps adults with mild ID wait for bigger rewards, but you must schedule booster sessions to keep the gains alive.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Khan et al. (2012) worked with adults who have mild intellectual disability.
They taught each person to use a green-red bar card that shows waiting time and reward size.
The team then tested if the card helped people wait longer for a bigger prize in real life.
What they found
Using the card, adults waited longer and picked the bigger, later reward more often.
Two months later they still used the card perfectly, but the waiting gains had faded.
Booster practice would be needed to keep the waiting skill strong.
How this fits with other research
This paper is a direct replication of Grzadzinski et al. (2011). Both used the same red-green bar aid and got positive results.
Poppes et al. (2010) showed that adults with ID usually ignore most money facts and fixate on one cue. The visual card fixes this by making every cue visible at once.
Hall et al. (2005) found that real-life money practice, not IQ, drives financial skill. The card gives that structured practice in a single pocket tool.
Why it matters
You can hand the card to adults who leap at small, fast rewards. In one session they learn to line up the bars and see the better deal. Plan brief refreshers every few weeks so the waiting habit stays strong.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Make a 4-inch green-red bar card and teach one client to line up the bars before choosing wait times.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous research has demonstrated that people with mild intellectual disabilities (ID) have difficulty in 'weighing up' information, defined as integrating disparate items of information in order to reach a decision. However, this problem could be overcome by the use of a visual aid to decision making. In an earlier study, participants were taught to translate information about the pros and cons of different choices into a single evaluative dimension, by manipulating green (good) and red (bad) bars of varying lengths (corresponding to the value ascribed). Use of the visual calculator increased the consistency of performance (and decreased impulsive responding) in a temporal discounting task, and increased the amount of information that participants provided to justify their decisions in scenario-based financial decision-making tasks. METHODS: The present study examined some practical aspects of visual calculator training, using a pen-and-paper version of two temporal discounting tasks. Participants with mild ID were tested, individually and in a group setting, before and after training in the group setting, and 2 months later. RESULTS: (i) The visual aid improved temporal discounting performance using pen-and-paper presentation in a group setting as effectively as previously demonstrated using computer-based individual presentation. (ii) Following withdrawal of the aid, improvements in temporal discounting performance were maintained at 1 day post training, but lost following a 2-month hiatus; however, participants showed perfect retention, over 2 months, of how to use the aid. (iii) In addition to decreasing impulsivity in a hypothetical task, as previously demonstrated, use of the visual calculator also increased the ability of impulsive participants to wait in real time. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that the visual calculator has practical applicability to support decision making by people with mild ID in community settings.
Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR, 2012 · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2788.2011.01498.x