美国马里兰论文代写:因素或行为

Keywords:美国马里兰论文代写

有一些因素或行为，经常出现在智障人士。这些具有挑战性的行为采取各种形式，如打出来的人，踢，投掷物体和拉头发。其他行为包括不必要的性接触和自我伤害。非体育行为的观察可以故意弄脏、润湿、呕吐、涂抹或拍打粪便（乔伊斯，2001，P130）。所有这些行为是暴力和积极性的员工觉得最难处理和冲拍评为最高行为的频率在Sawuck和李维斯的研究（2003，P9）。本研究探讨的范围，类型和频率的挑战性行为的智障人士使用“清单的挑战性行为”（CCB）。在研究方法上，本研究采用一个具有挑战性的行为评定量表，通过发送建行员工小队列成员的智力残疾的居住环境。结果表明，调查显示，住宅服务用户的侵略性和暴力行为，更难以管理和更严重的性质比那些有很大比例的学习困难的人所示。有争议的是，这些发现的原因是多方面的。例如，在建行给出的答案是主观的，在小住宅设置的暴力和侵略是更高的观察和论证，因此更有可能被记录。方法论研究的信度和效度问题如小队列，使得本文的研究不能一概而论的智力残疾人口作为一个整体。然而，有争议的，结果在行为管理策略，对员工进行培训的迹象。
美国马里兰论文代写:因素或行为
There are certain factors or behaviours that are frequently seen in individuals with intellectual disabilities. These challenging behaviours take on various forms such as hitting out at people, kicking, throwing objects and pulling hair. Other behaviours displayed include unwanted sexual contact and self-injury. Non-physical behaviours observed can be deliberate soiling, wetting and vomiting and smearing or flicking faeces (Joyce, 2001, p130). Of all these behaviours it is the violent and aggressively natured ones that staff find most difficult to deal with and punching and slapping rated highest in the frequency of behaviours in a study by Sawuck and Reeves (2003, p9). This study examined the range, type and frequency of challenging behaviours in the intellectually disabled population by using a “checklist of challenging behaviours” (CCB). Methodologically, this study used a rating scale of challenging behaviour, by sending the CCB to a small cohort of staff members in an intellectual disability residential setting. The results indicated that the residential service users surveyed displayed aggressive and violent behaviours that are more difficult to manage and more severe in nature than those shown by a large proportion of people with learning difficulties. It is debated that there are various reasons for these findings. For example, the answers given in the CCB are subjective and violence and aggression in a small residential setting is more highly observable and arguably, consequently more likely to be recorded. Methodologically the study has reliability and validity issues such as the small cohort that makes this study unable to be generalised to the intellectual disabled population as a whole. However, debatably, the results have clear indications for staff training in behaviour management strategies.