Teaching Young Adults With Disabilities To Respond Appropria

Teaching Young Adults With Disabilities To Respondappropriately To Lu

Teaching young adults with intellectual disabilities (ID) to respond appropriately to strangers' lures is crucial for enhancing their safety and independence. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a combined classroom behavior skills training (BST) and in situ training intervention designed to teach young adults with mild ID how to respond effectively to strangers' lures, thereby reducing their vulnerability to abduction and exploitation.

Individuals with ID are disproportionately vulnerable to crimes such as physical and sexual assaults, with adults with ID being at least twice as likely to experience such crimes as their nondisabled peers (Wilson & Brewer, 1992). Parental concerns about safety often restrict opportunities for independence and community participation, underscoring the importance of developing effective safety skills interventions. Previous research indicates that typically developing children can learn a three-step safety response—saying “no,” moving away, and reporting to a trusted adult—primarily through behavior skills training (Miltenberger & Olsen, 1996). However, generalization of these skills to real-world settings remains challenging, particularly for individuals with ID. Classroom training often leads to skill acquisition in role-play but does not reliably generalize in situ, and repeated in situ assessments can inadvertently prime participants to anticipate instructor involvement, possibly impairing genuine responses to real strangers (Johnson et al., 2006; Collins et al., 1992).

Methodology

The study involved five young adults with mild ID, ages ranging from 20 to 23 years, recruited from their community settings. The participants exhibited baseline abilities to follow three-part instructions and interacted with strangers without displaying targeted safety behaviors. Confederates, that is, actors posed as strangers, approached participants in various community settings, including coffee shops, grocery stores, and recreational centers, with different types of lures such as general (“Will you come with me?”), authority (“Your mom asked me to pick you up”), incentive (“I will buy you a soda if you come with me”), and assistance (“Can you help me carry this to my car?”). The dependent variables included participants’ responses on a safety rating scale from 0 (compliance with the stranger) to 4 (saying “no,” walking away, and reporting). The primary goal was for participants to correctly exhibit the three protective behaviors: responding "no" within three seconds, walking away within three seconds, and reporting to a trusted adult, with mastery defined as a safety rating of 3 or higher.

Interventions Applied

The intervention sequence incorporated two key phases: classroom BST and in situ training. Classroom BST involved daily sessions where participants learned to identify strangers, understand common lure types, and rehearse the safety response through instructions, modeling, role-play, and feedback. The modeling involved examples and non-examples to demonstrate appropriate responses, while role-plays provided opportunities for participants to practice these responses in simulated scenarios. Criteria for mastery in classroom settings included moving five or more steps away from the trainer within three seconds in at least four out of five role-plays across three consecutive days.

Following successful classroom training, in situ training was conducted within community settings, aimed at promoting generalization. During these sessions, the trainer and participant repeated role-plays, and the participant’s responses were observed by confederates without prior presentation or warning of the in situ assessments, thus maintaining the ecological validity. In situ assessments occurred every 1–2 weeks initially, and then monthly for three months post-intervention, with the goal of encouraging real-world application of safety responses under natural conditions.

Results and Findings

The results demonstrated that all participants rapidly acquired the safety response during classroom BST, typically within four days. During initial in situ assessments, some participants only occasionally demonstrated mastery, indicating limited generalization from classroom to real-world scenarios. However, following in situ training, all participants showed improved responses during in situ assessments, with some maintaining these behaviors for up to three months, although variability was observed among individuals. Notably, Emma, Wyatt, and Ben consistently responded correctly during follow-up assessments, while others showed some decline but benefited from booster sessions, which reinforced skill retention.

This pattern highlights that while classroom training effectively induces skill acquisition, the addition of in situ training in community settings enhances the generalization and durability of these safety behaviors. The intervention was well accepted by participants and their parents, with reports indicating increased comfort and independence in community participation without increased fear or anxiety. It also illustrated that ongoing practice and reinforcement, possibly by parents or caregivers, contribute significantly to maintaining safety responses over time.

Discussion and Implications

This study addresses a critical gap in safety interventions for adults with ID by integrating in situ training into the learning process, rather than relying solely on classroom-based instruction. The findings confirm that young adults with mild ID are capable of learning and generalizing abduction prevention skills when provided with systematic, multi-modal training programs. This approach aligns with prior research emphasizing the importance of real-world practice for successful skill generalization (Gast et al., 1993; Gunby, Carr, & LeBlanc, 2010). The use of multiple community settings for training and assessments likely contributed to the relatively sustained skill retention observed over three months, which is promising for practical application.

Nevertheless, some challenges persist. Recruitment of diverse adult strangers for assessments proved difficult, possibly limiting the ecological validity across different cultural contexts. Logistical barriers such as scheduling and transportation issues constrained the frequency and breadth of in situ assessments. Importantly, response consistency, particularly reporting to adults, was variable, underscoring the need for ongoing reinforcement and possibly incorporating communication aids or prompts tailored to individual abilities. Future research should focus on larger sample sizes, extended follow-up periods, and the integration of caregiver training to foster continued practice and reinforcement outside of formal sessions.

Conclusion

The integration of classroom BST with structured in situ training provides a robust framework for teaching safety skills to young adults with ID. The findings demonstrate that with systematic instruction, modeling, role-play, and natural environment practice, individuals with mild ID can learn critical safety behaviors, generalize these skills to community settings, and maintain them over time. These interventions hold promise for promoting independence, reducing vulnerability to exploitation, and improving quality of life among adults with intellectual disabilities.

References

• Beville, A. R., & Gast, D. L. (1998). Social safety for young children: A review of the literature on safety skills instruction. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 18(4), 222–234. https://doi.org/10.1177/027112149801800404
• Gast, D. L., Collins, B. C., Wolery, M., & Jones, R. (1993). Teaching preschool children with disabilities to respond to the lures of strangers. Exceptional Children, 59(4), 301–311.
• Gunby, K. V., Carr, J. E., & LeBlanc, L. A. (2010). Teaching abduction-prevention skills to children with autism. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 43(1), 107–112. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2010.43-107
• Johnson, B. M., Miltenberger, R. G., Knudson, P., Egemo-Helm, K., Kelso, P., Jostad, C. M., & Langley, L. (2006). A preliminary evaluation of two behavior skills training procedures for teaching abduction-prevention skills to schoolchildren. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 39(1), 25–34. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2006.167-04
• Kennedy, C. H. (2005). Single-case designs for educational research. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
• Miltenberger, R. G., & Olsen, L. A. (1996). Abduction prevention training: A review of findings and issues for future research. Education and Treatment of Children, 19(1), 69–82.
• Sparrow, S., Cicchetti, D., & Balla, D. (2005). Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales (2nd ed.). Circle Pines, MN: AGS Publishing.
• Wilson, C., & Brewer, N. (1992). The incidence of criminal victimisation of individuals with an intellectual disability. Australian Psychologist, 27(2), 114–117. https://doi.org/10.1080/00050069208258954