Social goals and conflict strategies of individuals with mild to moderate intellectual disabilities who present problems of aggression.
Adults with ID who are aggressive enter social situations wanting control and expecting humiliation if they give in—so assess and treat these thoughts along with the behavior.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team compared two groups of adults with mild to moderate intellectual disability.
One group had a history of hitting, yelling, or other aggressive acts. The other group did not.
Each adult answered questions about what they want from social situations and what they expect will happen.
What they found
Aggressive adults wanted different things from social life. They also feared worse outcomes if they gave in or stayed quiet.
These thoughts may push them to fight instead of walk away.
How this fits with other research
Gaily et al. (1998) and Cramm et al. (2009) used the QABF to show that aggression in ID adults is usually maintained by attention, escape, or tangibles. The new study adds a layer: people choose aggression partly because they expect bad things will happen if they do not.
Slocum et al. (2024) tested a treatment for aggression kept going by social avoidance. Their success supports the current finding: when people expect pain from social give-in, teaching safe ways to stay in the interaction can cut aggression.
Firth et al. (2001) watched caregivers and saw that aggression most often earns quick attention. The present paper explains why clients keep using that route: they believe the other choices will feel worse.
Why it matters
You already run a QABF to find the pay-off for hitting or screaming. Now add a short interview or checklist that asks, "What do you want here?" and "What do you think will happen if you back off?" When the client says, "They will laugh at me," you have a clear cognitive target. Pair your reinforcement plan with self-talk or role-play that rehearses safe ways to yield. This simple extra step can make your behavior plan stick better.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Add two questions to your intake: "What do you want when conflict starts?" and "What usually happens if you give in?"—then practice new answers in role-play.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
BACKGROUND: A few recent studies have adopted a social cognitive perspective to explore how individuals with intellectual disabilities (IDs), who present problems of aggression, view their social world. The focus has mainly been on participants' perceptions of others' behaviour within conflict situations. The present exploratory study aims to compliment existing research by exploring social cognitive factors that may influence how individuals respond to conflict. METHODS: Study was carried out with 20 aggressive and 20 non-aggressive men and women who have a mild to moderate ID. The 'Social Goals and Strategies for Conflict' (SGASC) assessment was devised to explore whether group or gender differences could be found in participants' expected outcomes of aggressive strategies, their expected outcomes of submissive strategies and their emotional reaction to these outcomes. Participants' social goals within hypothetical situations of conflict were also explored. RESULTS: It was found that aggressive and non-aggressive participants have different social goals. There were no significant differences for expected outcomes of aggression or submissiveness. Nevertheless, a number of trends suggest that more aggressive participants expect negative outcomes for submissiveness compared with their non-aggressive peers. CONCLUSIONS: While the findings of this study are tentative, investigating the social outcomes that are valued by individuals with ID who present problems of aggression appears to be a promising area for further research, with possible implications for clinical assessment and treatment.
Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR, 2008 · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2788.2007.01039.x