Learning and mastery behaviours as risk factors to abandonment in a paediatric user of advanced single-switch access technology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The present descriptive case study documents the behaviours of a child single-switch user in the community setting and draws attention to learning and mastery behaviours as risk factors to single-switch abandonment. Our observations were interpreted in the context of a longer term school-based evaluation of an advanced single-switch access technology with a nine year-old user with severe spastic quadriplegic cerebral palsy. METHOD: The child completed 25 experiment sessions averaging a rate of three sessions every two weeks. During each session he worked on several blocks of single-switch computer activity using his vocal cord vibration switch. RESULTS: Despite high levels of single-switch sensitivity and specificity that suggested a good fit between the participant and the technology, the participant perceived a lower proficiency level of his own abilities, demonstrated impatience and intolerance to interaction errors, and was apprehensive of making mistakes when using his switch in public. CONCLUSIONS: The benefit of gaining some degree of independent physical access might not necessarily enhance resilience to interaction errors or bouts of poor task performance. On the other hand, the participant's behaviours were consistent with those of a typically developing child learning or mastering any new skill or task. Implications for Rehabilitation The attitude and behaviour of a paediatric switch user towards skill development can be risk factors to abandonment of an access technology, despite successful clinical trial with the device. Children with severe disabilities can be associated with the same types of skill development behaviour patterns and achievement motivation as their typically developing peers. Empirical observations of the case participant's switch use behaviours suggest that user training could be adaptive in order to account for individual differences in skill development and achievement motivation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".