A new Intensive Interaction research paper has just been published by the British Journal of Learning Disabilities. Below I have presented the abstract of the paper; the full version is now available as an 'early view' on-line version at https://doi.org/10.1111/bld.12355

A qualitative study of the practice‐related decision‐making of Intensive Interaction Practitioners

 by Graham Firth, Megan Glyde and Gemma Denby

British Journal of Learning Disabilities First published: 06 November 2020

 

https://doi.org/10.1111/bld.12355

Abstract

Background

This study looked to investigate the sometimes conscious and sometimes intuitive decision‐making processes of Intensive Interaction practitioners. More specifically, this study set out to develop a rich description of how practitioners make judgements when developing a dynamic repertoire of Intensive Interaction strategies with people with severe or profound learning difficulties and/or autism, how this decision‐making process is enacted in practice and what issues inform such decisions.

Materials and Methods

This research followed a “Template Analysis” qualitative methodology, informed by semi‐structured interviews with 13 experienced Intensive Interaction Practitioners (who had completed the Intensive Interaction Coordinators course as administered by the Intensive Interaction Institute). The participants included the following: speech and language therapists, parents, teachers, residential care staff and managers, and a clinical psychologist.

Results

The findings of this study indicate why and how certain decisions are made by experienced practitioners before, during and after engagement in Intensive Interaction. Such decision‐making is indicated as sometimes being intuitive in nature, sometimes more conscious, sometimes moving between the two cognitive states as differing issues arise.

Practitioner decision‐making was focused on a number of issues, including specific learning or care “agendas”; practitioner confidence and knowledge; environmental considerations; individual learner characteristics and behaviour; learner attention, “attunement” and arousal levels; building a shared “repertoire”; and issues of available time.

Conclusions

The issue of how novice Intensive Interaction practitioners may best be supported to more quickly and confidently develop improved Intensive Interaction practices is discussed, proposing the development of a cyclical process of experiential learning and supported reflection.