Therapist-Child Interaction during Sensory Integration Treatment: Development and Testing of a Research Tool

Abstract

Although Ayres (1972) identified the interaction between therapist and child as an essential feature of successful sensory integration treatment, this aspect of the treatment process has not been examined in efficacy studies to date. In part, this omission may be explained by the lack of adequate measurement tools for this purpose. This paper reports on the development and reliability testing of the Challenge Coding System, a quantitative research tool designed to examine the collaboration of therapist and child in the sensory integration treatment process. Data from three studies are reported that collectively demonstrate that important aspects of the therapeutic interaction can be measured reliably. Potential uses of the new instrument in research are discussed.

Keywords

instrument reliability therapeutic interaction pediatrics

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ayres

A. J.

(1972). Sensory integration and learning disorders. Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services.

Bakeman

, & Gottman

J. M.

(1986). Observing interaction: An introduction to sequential analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bundy

(1991). Play theory and sensory integration. In Fisher

A. G.

Murray

E. A.

, & Bundy

A. C.

(Eds.), Sensory integration: Theory and practice (pp. 46–68). Philadelphia: F. A. Davis.

Carlson

M. E.

, & Clark

F. A.

(1991). The search for useful methodologies in occupational science. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 45, 235–241.

Clark

, & Pierce

(1986). Synopsis of pediatric occupational therapy effectiveness. In: Proceedings of Occupational Therapy for Maternal Health Care Conference, Vol 1, 226–244. Washington, DC: Division of Maternal and Child Health, Department of Health and Human Services.

Cohen

(1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 37–46.

Koomar

J. A.

, & Bundy

A. C.

(1991). The art and science of creating direct intervention from theory. In Fisher

A. G.

Murray

E. A.

, & Bundy

A. C.

(Eds.), Sensory integration: Theory and practice (pp. 251–314). Philadelphia: F. A. Davis.

Ottenbacher

(1982). Sensory integration therapy: Affect or effect? American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 36, 571–578.

Ottenbacher

K. J.

(1991). Research on sensory integration: Empirical perspectives and progress. In Fisher

A. G.

Murray

E. A.

, & Bundy

A. C.

(Eds.), Sensory integration: Theory and practice (pp. 387–399). Philadelphia: F. A. Davis.

10.

Reed

E. S.

Mayer

Montgomery

Palmer

, & Schwartz

(1989). The organization of everyday action: A conceptual and methodological analysis. Paper presented at the 5th International Conference on Event Perception and Action, Oxford, OH.

11.

Rogoff

(1990). Apprenticeship in thinking. New York: Oxford University Press.

12.

Rosenthal

, & Rosnow

R. L.

(1991). Essentials of behavioral research: Methods and data analysis (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

13.

Shrout

P. E.

, & Fleiss

J. L.

(1979). Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 420–428.

14.

Tickle-Degnen

(1988). Perspectives on the status of sensory integration therapy. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 42, 427–433.

15.

von Cranach

, & Kalbermatten

(1982). Ordinary interactive action: Theory, methods, and some empirical findings. In von Cranach

, & Harre

(Eds.), The analysis of action (pp. 115–160). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

16.

Wood

Bruner

J. A.

, & Ross

(1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17, 89–100.

17.

Yerxa

(1991). Nationally speaking—Seeking a relevant, ethical, and realistic way of knowing for occupational therapy. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 45, 199–204.