The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of using augmented reality applications to identify potential food allergens. Seven individuals with intellectual disabilities participated. Participants were shown how to use a mobile device equipped with the Red Laser application to identify potential food allergens. Results indicated a functional relation. All participants readily identified possible food allergens using augmented reality and maintained the skill six weeks later. Conclusions are discussed in the context of using augmented reality applications to increase independent living skills for individuals with intellectual disabilities.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AdamsG.EnglemannS. (1996). Research on direct instruction: 25 years beyond DISTAR. Seattle, WA: Educational Achievement Systems.
2.
American Dietetic Association. (2010). Position of the American Dietetic Association: Providing nutrition services for people with developmental disabilities and special health care needs. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 110, 296–307.
3.
BrooksB. M.RoseF. D.AttreeE. A.Elliot-SquareA. (2002). An evaluation of the efficacy of training people with learning disabilities in a virtual environment. Disability and Rehabilitation, 24, 622–626.
4.
BrowderD. M.WakemanS. Y.SpoonerF.Ahlgrim-DelzellL.AlgozzineB. (2006). Research on reading instruction for individuals with significant cognitive disabilities. Exceptional Children, 72, 392–408.
5.
BrowderD. M.XinY. P. (1998). A meta-analysis and review of sight word research and its implications for teaching functional reading to individuals with moderate and severe disabilities. Journal of Special Education, 32, 130–153.
6.
CAST. (2011). Universal Design for Learning guidelines: Version 2.0. Wakefield, MA: CAST.
7.
CookA. M.PolgarJ. M.HusseyS. M. (2008). Cook & Hussey's assistive technologies: Principles and practice. St. Louis, MO: Mosby.
8.
CihakD. F.KesslerK.AlbertoP. A. (2007). Generalized use of handheld prompting systems. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 28, 397–408.
9.
CihakD. F.KesslerK.AlbertoP. A. (2008). Use of a handheld prompting system to transition independently through vocational tasks for students with moderate and severe intellectual disabilities. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 43, 102–110.
10.
Coleman-MartinM. B.HellerK. W.CihakD. F.IrvineK. (2005). Using computer assistive instruction and the nonverbal reading approach to teach word identification. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 20, 80–90.
11.
CoyneP.PishaB.DaltonB.ZephL. A.SmithN. C. (2012). Literacy by design: A Universal Design for Learning approach for students with significant intellectual disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 33, 162–172.
12.
DaviesD. K.StockS.WehmeyerM. L. (2002a). Enhancing independent task performance for individuals with mental retardation through use of a handheld self-directed visual and audio prompting system. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 37, 209–218.
13.
DaviesD. K.StockS.WehmeyerM. L. (2002b). Enhancing independent time-management skills of individuals with mental retardation using a palmtop personal computer. Mental Retardation, 40, 358–365.
14.
DaviesD. K.StockS.WehmeyerM. L. (2004). A palmtop computer-based intelligent aid for individuals with intellectual disabilities to increase independent decision making. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 28, 182–193.
15.
DiekerL.HynesM.HughesC.SmithE. (2008). Implications of mixed reality and simulation technologies on special education and teacher preparation. Focus on Exceptional Children, 40(6), 1–19.
16.
DraheimC. C.StanishH. I.WilliamsD. P.McCubbinJ. A. (2007). Dietary intake of adults with mental retardation who reside in community settings. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 112, 392–400.
17.
EmersonM. (2005). Underweight, obesity and exercise among adults with intellectual disabilities in supported accommodation in Northern England. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 49, 134–143.
18.
EtxeberriaA. I.AsensioM.VicentN.CuencaJ. M. (2012). Mobile devices: A tool for tourism and learning at archaeological sites. International Journal of Web Based Communities, 8(1), 57–72.
19.
FergusonH.Myles-SmithB.HagiwaraT. (2005). Using a personal digital assistant to enhance the independence of an adolescent with Asperger syndrome. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 40, 60–67.
20.
GastD. L. (2010). Single subject research methodology in behavioral sciences. New York, NY: Routledge.
21.
KellasG.AshcraftM. H.JohnsonN. S.NeedhamS. (1973). Temporal aspects of storage and retrieval in free recall of categorized lists. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 12(5), 499–511.
22.
HammondJ. L.HirtM.HallS. S. (2012). Effects of computerized match-to-sample training on emergent fraction–decimal relations in individuals with fragile X syndrome. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 33(1), 1–11.
23.
HansenD. L.MorganR. L. (2008). Teaching grocery store purchasing skills to students with intellectual disabilities using a computer-based instruction program. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 43(4), 431.
24.
HappestadB. S. (2007). Inadequacies in computer access using assistive technology devices in profoundly disabled individuals: An overview of the current literature. Disability and Rehabilitation, 2, 189–199.
25.
HellerT.McCubbinJ.DrumC.PetersonJ. (2011). Physical activity and nutrition health promotion interventions: What is working for people with intellectual disabilities?Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 49, 26–36.
26.
HornerR. H.CarrE. G.HalleJ.McGeeG.OdomS.WoleryM. (2005). The use of single-subject research to identify evidence-based practice in special education. Exceptional Children, 71(2), 165–179.
27.
KlingA.CampbellP. H.WilcoxJ. (2010). Young children with physical disabilities: Caregiver perspectives about assistive technology. Infants & Young Children, 23(3), 169–183.
28.
MechlingL. C.HunnicuttJ. R. (2011). Computer-based video self-modeling to teach receptive understanding of prepositions by students with intellectual disabilities. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 46(3), 369.
29.
MechlingL. C.Ortega-HurndonF. (2007). Computer-based video instruction to teach young adults with moderate intellectual disabilities to perform multiple step, job tasks in a generalized setting. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 42(1), 24.
30.
McMahonD.SmithC. (2012). Universal Design for Learning: Implications and applications in UT Knoxville FUTURE program. A Think College Brief on Policy, Research, & Practice, 14, 1–4.
31.
MigramP.KishinoF. (1994). A Taxonomy of Mixed Reality Visual Displays. IEICE Transactions on Information Systems, 77(12), 1321–1329.
OgataH.YanoY. (2004). Context-aware support for computer supported ubiquitous learning. Proceedings of IEEE International Workshop on Wireless and Mobile Technologies in Education (WMTE) 2004 (pp. 27–34). Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press.
34.
ParetteH. P.Jr (1991). The Importance of Technology in the Education and Training of Persons with Mental Retardation. Education and Training in Mental Retardation, 26(2), 165–78.
35.
PenceH. E. (2011). Smartphones, smart objects, and augmented reality. Reference Librarian, 52, 136–145.
36.
RichardE.BillaudeauV.RichardP.GaudinG. (2007). Augmented reality for rehabilitation of cognitive disabled children: A preliminary study. Virtual Rehabilitation, 102–108. doi:10.1109/ICVR.2007.4362148
37.
ShneidermanB.PlaisantC. (2010). Designing the user interface: Strategies for effective human-computer interaction (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.
38.
TanisE. S.PalmerS.WehmeyerM.DaviesD. K.StockS. E.LobbK.BishopB. (2012). Self-report computer-based survey of technology use by people with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 50(1), 53–68.
39.
WongB. (1978). The effects of directive cues on the organization of memory and recall in good and poor readers. Journal of Educational Research, 72, 32–38.
