Practitioner Development

How staff pursue questions to adults with intellectual disabilities.

Finlay et al. (2012) · Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR 2012
★ The Verdict

When adults with ID give fuzzy answers, staff have seven quick ways to ask again without shutting the person down.

✓ Read this if BCBAs who coach direct support staff in day programs or group homes.
✗ Skip if Clinicians who only run highly structured DTT sessions with vocal learners.

01Research in Context

01

What this study did

Researchers listened to 30 hours of staff talking with adults who have intellectual disabilities.

They wanted to see what staff do when the first question gets a blank stare or a mumble.

The team wrote down every follow-up move staff made and sorted them into seven clear types.

02

What they found

Staff rarely give up after one unclear answer.

Instead they stretch, shrink, re-word, or even act out the question until the person responds.

These tiny fixes keep the chat alive and show respect for the adult’s pace.

03

How this fits with other research

Catania et al. (2015) moved the same idea into police stations. They showed adults with ID can push back against tricky questions, but only if officers use the same gentle reformulations this study found.

Perske (2010) gives police a 20-item cheat-sheet of ID answer styles. Pair that list with the seven staff moves here and you get a full script for safe interviews.

Antaki (2012) adds a twist: physical tasks create more success than extra questions. So when words fail, hand the person a sponge or a trowel, then ask again while you work side-by-side.

04

Why it matters

You now have a tiny menu: expand, simplify, re-word, model, switch to a physical task.

Tape one staff session this week and count how often you use each move.

Swap the least-used tactic into your next conversation and see if answers get clearer.

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

Pick one client, ask a question, and if you get a blank, try the ‘expand and simplify’ reformulation before you prompt.

02At a glance

Intervention
not applicable
Design
qualitative
Population
intellectual disability
Finding
not reported

03Original abstract

BACKGROUND: When support staff use questions to instruct, advise or guide adults with intellectual disabilities (ID), or to solicit information from them, the interaction does not always proceed smoothly, particularly when replies are ambiguous, absent or not obviously relevant. That can lead to interactional trouble and dissatisfaction, or worse. METHODS: We report on the ways in which staff members transform their questions over a series of conversational turns in order to solicit an adequate reply, and thereby to fulfil the interactional goal of the question. Our data come from approximately 30 h of recordings of natural conversation between staff members and adults with ID in two residential and one outdoor activities settings. RESULTS: We identify seven practices by which staff attempt to resolve the dilemma between undue direction and premature closure. These include: expansion of the original question, simplifying its format, changing its content in various ways and realising its alternatives in physical form. CONCLUSIONS: We highlight strategies which produce answers satisfactory to both parties, and improve the quality of interaction between staff and people with ID.

Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR, 2012 · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2788.2011.01478.x