Date Presented 4/20/2018
This study adds to the limited knowledge base on technology use, including devices, applications, and related skills, among individuals with developmental disabilities. We examined the feasibility of using an adapted and guided self-report survey with this understudied population.
Primary Author and Speaker: Sherly Kornhaber
Additional Authors and Speakers: Madeline Allen, Jack Reism, Holly Vassell, Amiya Waldman-Levi
PURPOSE: For technology to be a viable aid to support everyday function of people with developmental disabilities (DD), technical competence should be assessed first. Assessing individuals with DD for technology exposure and knowledge can be challenging because of their varied levels of comprehension and function. The aim of this study was to establish a comprehensive survey to capture use of technology among adults with DD.
METHOD: For this descriptive survey study, survey development included four steps: (1) informal observations of participants’ everyday performance and level of comprehension, (2) interviews with participants and their caregivers, (3) review of the literature on assessment and measurement, and (4) survey compilation. Two survey formats were developed: a long version for those with a higher level of comprehension and a short version. Both versions comprised four sections: (1) access, (2) knowledge, (3) skill, and (4) motivation to learn about technology to support everyday function. Questions had simplified wording and included an observation assessment aspect. Response options were simplified for and relevant to participants and allowed respondents to use gestures. Surveys were administered using the MobilizingCS application (University of California, Los Angeles [UCLA]) for iPad (Apple, Cupertino, CA) powered by Ohmage (UCLA Labor Center, Los Angeles, CA).
Graduate students met with participants at the agency. Participants were administered one of the survey versions on the basis of their level of comprehension and everyday function. During survey administration, an additional iPad was used for participants to demonstrate skill. Data were aggregated and then transferred to IBM SPSS Statistics Version 23 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY) for descriptive analysis of the survey content areas.
RESULTS: A total of 66 adults completed the survey, 35 the long form and 31 the short form. Of the long form participants (M age = 28.7, SD = 7.6; 69% female), 51% to 71% reported having access to a smartphone or iPhone, tablet or iPad, or gaming system; 2.7% to 8.6% had knowledge of various actions (e.g., set a reminder, use social media, take pictures); 74% to 80% demonstrated basic operation skills (e.g., swiping through screens, opening and closing apps); 83% reported having someone assist them in using the technology; and 80% expressed motivation to learn more about technology. Among the short form participants (M age = 46, SD = 16; 71% male), 13% to 23% reported having access to a computer, tablet, or phone; many demonstrated limited knowledge of what a device can do (80% skipped the question, and few knew devices can be used for communication [3.2%] and playing games [13%]); the skill level of many was limited to basic operations (e.g., 38.7% could turn on an iPad, 28.7% mimicked the use of sketch, 6.4% were able to turn off an iPad); and 55% expressed motivation to learn more about technology.
CONCLUSION: Participants with DD who had higher levels of function had better access, basic knowledge, and skills in using technology compared with those with lower function. However, they were not using it to further support their everyday function. Participants with lower levels of function had limited access, basic knowledge, and skills in using technology, although many expressed motivation to learn. Interventions that promote everyday function in adults with DD should incorporate assessment of their use of technology.
IMPACT STATEMENT: This preliminary survey can inform occupational therapy practice about a new arena and provides an assessment tool to further promote clinical intervention with an understudied and underserved population of adults with DD and the growing field of technology.
References
Kagohara, D. M., van der Meer, L., Ramdoss, S., O’Reilly, M. F., Lancioni, G. E., Davis, T. N., . . . & Green, V. A. (2013). Using iPods® and iPads® in teaching programs for individuals with developmental disabilities: A systematic review. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 34, 147–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2012.07.027
Tanis, E. S., Palmer, S., Wehmeyer, M., Davies, D. K., Stock, S. E., Lobb, K., & Bishop, B. (2012). Self-report computer-based survey of technology use by people with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 50, 53–68. https://doi.org/10.1352/1934-9556-50.1.53