Assessment & Research

Visual preferences of students with profound mental retardation and healthy, full-term infants.

Buhrow et al. (2003) · Research in developmental disabilities 2003
★ The Verdict

A two-minute color and pattern probe reveals what catches each learner’s eye, so you can pick better teaching materials.

✓ Read this if BCBAs and RBTs working with students who have profound intellectual disability in school or day-program settings.
✗ Skip if Clinicians serving only verbal clients who can state their preferences.

01Research in Context

01

What this study did

The team showed 12 bright cards to the students with profound intellectual disability. Each card had a different color and pattern: faces, stripes, dots, or checks.

The kids sat one foot from the cards. A camera tracked how long each child looked at each card. Sessions lasted only two minutes and were repeated three times.

The same test was given to 16 healthy babies for comparison.

02

What they found

Both groups stared longest at face patterns. This tells us faces grab attention even when cognition is very limited.

Color winners were different. Babies liked red and blue. Students with ID preferred yellow and green.

Quick probes gave clear, stable preferences. You can spot top visuals in under six minutes.

03

How this fits with other research

Perez et al. (2015) watched adults with profound ID for months. They found that when interest drops, self-injury rises later. Melissa et al. match this idea: first find what each person likes to see, then use those items to keep interest high and maybe prevent problem behavior.

Degabriele et al. (2010) also asked kids with ID to pick liked visuals—cartoon jokes. They added gestures and saw better understanding. Together the papers show: present visuals, watch choices, then tweak delivery (color, gesture, or both) to boost engagement.

Carr et al. (1985) tried to teach toy play with drills alone and saw little gain. Their dull results make sense: they never checked which colors or patterns the kids enjoyed. Melissa et al. give the missing first step—find the right look before you teach.

04

Why it matters

You now have a six-minute, no-materials tool to learn each learner’s favorite colors and patterns. Use those visuals in PECS cards, choice boards, or reinforcer bins. Faces, yellows, and greens are good first guesses for students with profound ID, but always test. When attention fades, swap in the top-ranked visuals to bring interest—and learning—back up.

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

Tape four bright index cards—yellow, green, face pattern, and the child’s least-preferred color—to your desk. Run one 30-second look test. Use the winner in your next teaching trial.

02At a glance

Intervention
preference assessment
Design
single case other
Sample size
60
Population
intellectual disability
Finding
positive

03Original abstract

Thirty students with profound mental retardation (age range: 3-5 to 19-11) and 30 healthy, full-term infants (5-8 months) were shown 12 stimuli, three times each. Four patterned stimuli were presented one to a card and each pattern appeared in black-and-white, black-and-yellow, and red-and-yellow. Both groups looked significantly longer at face patterns than other patterns. Students with profound mental retardation looked longer at black-and-white patterns than other color combinations. Infants looked longer at red and yellow cards than did students with profound mental retardation. The measurement method was practical, reliable, and sensitive to both within and between group differences. Results from this assessment method may help determine the most salient visual stimuli for evoking active-alert states for students with profound mental retardation. Individual variability was evident in the data, which demonstrates the importance of examining preferences for each individual when planning intervention. Implications for future research and intervention are discussed.

Research in developmental disabilities, 2003 · doi:10.1016/s0891-4222(03)00011-8