Practitioner Development

The impact of staff and service user gender on staff responses towards adults with intellectual disabilities who display aggressive behaviour.

Kleinberg et al. (2014) · Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR 2014
★ The Verdict

Female staff feel more fear and less confidence when adults with ID become aggressive, so gender-aware training and mentoring are essential.

✓ Read this if BCBAs supervising adult residential or day programs where physical aggression occurs.
✗ Skip if Clinicians working only with young children or non-aggressive populations.

01Research in Context

01

What this study did

The team asked staff how they feel and act when adults with intellectual disabilities become aggressive.

They looked at whether the staff member’s gender and the client’s gender changed those answers.

The study used surveys and interviews in adult residential and day services.

02

What they found

Female staff said they feel more fear and less confidence than male staff during aggressive episodes.

Both men and women staff showed gender-biased response patterns toward clients.

Staff gender had a bigger impact on reactions than client gender.

03

How this fits with other research

Saville et al. (2002) already showed that real aggression sparks stronger negative feelings than hypothetical stories; the new data add that being female amplifies those feelings.

Flynn et al. (2018) found that how often staff see aggression does not predict burnout; together the two studies hint that who the staff are (gender, mindset) matters more than exposure dose.

Dagnan et al. (2005) showed that blaming the client less boosts sympathy; the 2014 findings suggest female staff may start with less blame but also less confidence, a nuance that training can target.

04

Why it matters

You can’t change a staff member’s gender, but you can give female staff extra practice and coaching so fear does not drive weak or avoidant responses.

Pairing less-confident staff with experienced mentors during high-risk shifts can balance the gender effect and keep clients safe.

When writing behavior plans, note which staff will implement them and adjust training intensity accordingly.

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

Add a two-minute role-play at shift start that lets female staff rehearse calm, firm redirection of mild aggression.

02At a glance

Intervention
not applicable
Design
other
Sample size
160
Population
intellectual disability
Finding
not reported

03Original abstract

BACKGROUND: The impact of staff and service user gender on responses of staff in intellectual disability (ID) services is poorly understood. The present study set out to assess the role of gender in influencing staff emotions, attributions and behavioural intentions in response to aggression displayed by adults with ID. METHOD: A new scale measuring staff behavioural intentions was developed. A two × two (staff gender × service user gender) between subjects design was used to compare the responses of day and residential support staff to physical aggression by a hypothetical service user. In response to a vignette depicting a service user with ID assaulting a member of staff, 160 respondents completed measures of affective responses, causal attributions and behavioural intentions while imagining themselves as the target of the service user's assault. RESULTS: Female participants reported feeling more fear/anxiety, more depression/anger and less confident/relaxed than male participants. The longer staff had worked with people with ID, the more likely they were to favour safety-focused behaviours. More confident female participants were less likely to favour safety-focused behaviours, but confidence had no effect on male participants' endorsement of these behaviours. Increased confidence in both was associated with lower agreement of safety-focused behaviours in relation to the female vignette, regardless of participant gender. The more control women believed the service user had over their behaviour, the more likely they were to choose safety-focused behaviours. Punitive behaviours were favoured more in response to the male rather than the female service user. Punitive behaviours were also favoured more by more junior staff and by participants who expected feeling more depressed/angry in response to the vignettes. CONCLUSIONS: Both staff and service user gender influenced staff responses to aggression, yet the latter played a smaller role than expected. The role of gender in staff-service user interactions should be the focus of further research and should be considered in service delivery.

Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR, 2014 · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2788.2012.01640.x