4.2 Article

Systematic instruction for individuals with acquired brain injury: Results of a randomised controlled trial

Journal

NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL REHABILITATION
Volume 22, Issue 1, Pages 85-112

Publisher

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/09602011.2011.640466

Keywords

Instruction; Errorless learning; Assistive technology; Memory; Cognitive impairment

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health, National Center for Medical and Rehabilitation Research [5R03HD054768]
  2. EUNICE KENNEDY SHRIVER NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CHILD HEALTH &HUMAN DEVELOPMENT [R03HD054768] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The goal of this study was to evaluate experimentally systematic instruction compared with trial-and-error learning (conventional instruction) applied to assistive technology for cognition (ATC), in a double-blind, pre-test-post-test, randomised controlled trial. Twenty-nine persons with moderate-severe cognitive impairments due to acquired brain injury (15 in systematic instruction group; 14 in conventional instruction) completed the study. Both groups received 12, 45-minute individual training sessions targeting selected skills on the Palm Tungsten E2 personal digital assistant (PDA). A criterion-based assessment of PDA skills was used to evaluate accuracy, fluency/efficiency, maintenance, and generalisation of skills. There were no significant differences between groups at immediate post-test with regard to accuracy and fluency. However, significant differences emerged at 30-day follow-up in favour of systematic instruction. Furthermore, systematic instruction participants performed significantly better at immediate post-test generalising trained PDA skills when interacting with people other than the instructor. These results demonstrate that systematic instruction applied to ATC results in better skill maintenance and generalisation than trial-and-error learning for individuals with moderate-severe cognitive impairments due to acquired brain injury. Implications, study limitations, and directions for future research are discussed.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available