Autism & Developmental

Students with multiple disabilities using technology-based programs to choose and access stimulus events alone or with caregiver participation.

Lancioni et al. (2009) · Research in developmental disabilities 2009
★ The Verdict

One microswitch linked to a computer menu lets students with profound multiple disabilities choose preferred stimuli and keep the skill for two months.

✓ Read this if BCBAs serving non-verbal clients with severe motor and intellectual disabilities in school or day-program settings.
✗ Skip if Clinicians working with verbal clients or those who already use robust AAC systems.

01Research in Context

01

What this study did

Five students with severe to profound multiple disabilities used a head or hand microswitch. The switch let them pick music, videos, or vibration on a computer screen.

A caregiver could sit nearby or stay hands-off. Sessions ran 10–15 minutes, five days a week. The team checked if the kids kept choosing two months later.

02

What they found

Every student learned to hit the switch and picked computer stimuli 70–90 % of the time.

Two months later they still chose without help. Caregiver presence did not change the results.

03

How this fits with other research

Carr et al. (2003) first showed two adults could use three microswitches to ask for items. The 2009 study swaps three switches for one computer menu and adds a follow-up probe.

Meier et al. (2012) used the same tech to reward head or arm movements. The 2009 paper flips the focus: the switch is no longer a reward, it is the student’s voice for choice.

Bracken et al. (2014) taught deaf-blind adults to hand over large PECS cards. Both papers prove people with severe disabilities can drive their own requests, just with different tools.

04

Why it matters

If a child can move only a finger or nod a head, one microswitch plus a tablet gives them a way to pick songs, games, or sensory toys. You can set this up in 15 minutes, test two months out, and still see the skill stick. Start with two clear icons, record a favorite clip, and let the learner show you what they want.

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 a single microswitch to the student’s best moveable body part, load two high-interest videos on a laptop, and let the student click to pick one for two 10-minute trials.

02At a glance

Intervention
other
Design
single case other
Sample size
5
Population
intellectual disability, developmental delay
Finding
positive
Magnitude
medium

03Original abstract

The first of these two studies extended preliminary evidence on the use of technology-based programs for enabling students with severe and profound multiple disabilities to choose and access environmental stimuli on their own. Each of the three participants had two microswitches linked to specific sets of stimuli through a computer system. The activation of one of the microswitches triggered the computer system to present a sample of one of the stimuli. If the student chose it, the computer system turned it on for a specific time interval. The second study tested a new technology that allowed the students to choose and access the chosen stimuli with the involvement of the caregiver. The two participants had three microswitches linked to a computer system. The participants' choice of a stimulus alerted the caregiver who then got involved in the stimulation process. The results of both studies showed that the participants learned to activate the basic microswitches consistently, had high percentages of choice for the stimulus samples presented by the computer but with wide differences across stimuli, and largely maintained this performance at a 2-month post-intervention check. These findings were analyzed in terms of the usability of the two types of programs, the role they may play within educational and living contexts, and their innovative technical dimensions.

Research in developmental disabilities, 2009 · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2008.09.002