title: Comparing Wrong/Right with Right/Right Exemplars in Video Modelling to Teach Social Skills to Children with Autism

authors: Dekker, Anna Margaretha

subjects: autism

abstract: Research has shown that video modelling can improve social behaviours in children with ASD.  In addition, research in behaviour modelling training from the field of organisational psychology has shown that using a mix of positive and negative exemplars can assist in acquisition and generalisation of a skill.  The current study compared the use of one negative and one positive exemplar, with the use of two positive exemplars to determine which combination would result in faster acquisition and/or superior generalisation of a skill. No other studies have examined this with children diagnosed with ASD. Seven children, aged between 5 and 15 years, and diagnosed with ASD participated in a multiple baseline design across children; within child across two modelling conditions; and within each modelling condition across two tasks. In one condition, a participant watched a video containing one exemplar of a model (same sex and of similar age but with normal development) perform a task the wrong way, and one exemplar of the same model perform the same task the right way (wrong/right).  In another condition, the participant watched a video containing two different exemplars of the model perform a matched task the right way (right/right). During the intervention, 1 participant refused to watch the videos.  For 13 of the 16 tasks, where training was completed, participants either reached criterion or made some gains in acquisition of the social skills.  However, for seven of the tasks criterion was not reached.  Generally, neither modelling condition was superior in acquisition or generalisation of the targeted social skills.  Confounds occurring during the course of the study may have contributed to the equivocal results.  For some children with ASD, video modelling in combination with the delivery of preferred reinforcers may be required for successful skill acquisition.  Further implications, particularly the potential negative effects of vicarious reinforcement when an observer does not gain reinforcement for imitation are discussed, as are recommendations for future research.

text: Comparing Wrong/Right with Right/Right Exemplars in Video Modelling to Teach Social Skills to Children with Autism Research has shown that video modelling can improve social behaviours in children with ASD.  In addition, research in behaviour modelling training from the field of organisational psychology has shown that using a mix of positive and negative exemplars can assist in acquisition and generalisation of a skill.  The current study compared the use of one negative and one positive exemplar, with the use of two positive exemplars to determine which combination would result in faster acquisition and/or superior generalisation of a skill. No other studies have examined this with children diagnosed with ASD. Seven children, aged between 5 and 15 years, and diagnosed with ASD participated in a multiple baseline design across children; within child across two modelling conditions; and within each modelling condition across two tasks. In one condition, a participant watched a video containing one exemplar of a model (same sex and of similar age but with normal development) perform a task the wrong way, and one exemplar of the same model perform the same task the right way (wrong/right).  In another condition, the participant watched a video containing two different exemplars of the model perform a matched task the right way (right/right). During the intervention, 1 participant refused to watch the videos.  For 13 of the 16 tasks, where training was completed, participants either reached criterion or made some gains in acquisition of the social skills.  However, for seven of the tasks criterion was not reached.  Generally, neither modelling condition was superior in acquisition or generalisation of the targeted social skills.  Confounds occurring during the course of the study may have contributed to the equivocal results.  For some children with ASD, video modelling in combination with the delivery of preferred reinforcers may be required for successful skill acquisition.  Further implications, particularly the potential negative effects of vicarious reinforcement when an observer does not gain reinforcement for imitation are discussed, as are recommendations for future research.

year: 2008

title: Top 10 priorities for future infertility research: an international consensus development study.

authors: Duffy, J.M.N.

subjects: Consensus science methods

abstract: STUDY QUESTION: Can the priorities for future research in infertility be identified?
SUMMARY ANSWER: The top 10 research priorities for the four areas of male infertility, female and unexplained infertility, medically assisted reproduction, and ethics, access, and organization of care for people with fertility problems were identified. 
WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Many fundamental questions regarding the prevention, management, and consequences of infertility remain unanswered. This is a barrier to improving the care received by those people with fertility problems. 
STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Potential research questions were collated from an initial international survey, a systematic review of clinical practice guidelines, and Cochrane systematic reviews. A rationalized list of confirmed research uncertainties was prioritized in an interim international survey. Prioritized research uncertainties were discussed during a consensus development meeting. Using a formal consensus development method, the modified nominal group technique, diverse stakeholders identified the top 10 research priorities for each of the categories male infertility, female and unexplained infertility, medically assisted reproduction, and ethics, access, and organization of care. 
PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Healthcare professionals, people with fertility problems, and others (healthcare funders, healthcare providers, healthcare regulators, research funding bodies and researchers) were brought together in an open and transparent process using formal consensus methods advocated by the James Lind Alliance. 
MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The initial survey was completed by 388 participants from 40 countries, and 423 potential research questions were submitted. Fourteen clinical practice guidelines and 162 Cochrane systematic reviews identified a further 236 potential research questions. A rationalized list of 231 confirmed research uncertainties were entered into an interim prioritization survey completed by 317 respondents from 43 countries. The top 10 research priorities for each of the four categories male infertility, female and unexplained infertility (including age-related infertility, ovarian cysts, uterine cavity abnormalities, and tubal factor infertility), medically assisted reproduction (including ovarian stimulation, IUI, and IVF), and ethics, access, and organization of care, were identified during a consensus development meeting involving 41 participants from 11 countries. These research priorities were diverse and seek answers to questions regarding prevention, treatment, and the longer-term impact of infertility. They highlight the importance of pursuing research which has often been overlooked, including addressing the emotional and psychological impact of infertility, improving access to fertility treatment, particularly in lower resource settings, and securing appropriate regulation. Addressing these priorities will require diverse research methodologies, including laboratory-based science, qualitative and quantitative research, and population science. 
LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: We used consensus development methods, which have inherent limitations, including the representativeness of the participant sample, methodological decisions informed by professional judgement, and arbitrary consensus definitions. 
WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: We anticipate that identified research priorities, developed to specifically highlight the most pressing clinical needs as perceived by healthcare professionals, people with fertility problems, and others, will help research funding organizations and researchers to develop their future research agenda. 
STUDY FUNDING/ COMPETING INTEREST(S): The study was funded by the Auckland Medical Research Foundation, Catalyst Fund, Royal Society of New Zealand, and Maurice and Phyllis Paykel Trust. Geoffrey Adamson reports research sponsorship from Abbott, personal fees from Abbott and LabCorp, a financial interest in Advanced Reproductive Care, committee membership of the FIGO Committee on Reproductive Medicine, International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technologies, International Federation of Fertility Societies, and World Endometriosis Research Foundation, and research sponsorship of the International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technologies from Abbott and Ferring. Siladitya Bhattacharya reports being the Editor-in-Chief of Human Reproduction Open and editor for the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group. Hans Evers reports being the Editor Emeritus of Human Reproduction. Andrew Horne reports research sponsorship from the Chief Scientist's Office, Ferring, Medical Research Council, National Institute for Health Research, and Wellbeing of Women and consultancy fees from Abbvie, Ferring, Nordic Pharma, and Roche Diagnostics. M. Louise Hull reports grants from Merck, grants from Myovant, grants from Bayer, outside the submitted work and ownership in Embrace Fertility, a private fertility company. Neil Johnson reports research sponsorship from Abb-Vie and Myovant Sciences and consultancy fees from Guerbet, Myovant Sciences, Roche Diagnostics, and Vifor Pharma. José Knijnenburg reports research sponsorship from Ferring and Theramex. Richard Legro reports consultancy fees from Abbvie, Bayer, Ferring, Fractyl, Insud Pharma and Kindex and research sponsorship from Guerbet and Hass Avocado Board. Ben Mol reports consultancy fees from Guerbet, iGenomix, Merck, Merck KGaA and ObsEva. Ernest Ng reports research sponsorship from Merck. Craig Niederberger reports being the Co Editor-in-Chief of Fertility and Sterility and Section Editor of the Journal of Urology, research sponsorship from Ferring, and retains a financial interest in NexHand. Jane Stewart reports being employed by a National Health Service fertility clinic, consultancy fees from Merck for educational events, sponsorship to attend a fertility conference from Ferring, and being a clinical subeditor of Human Fertility. Annika Strandell reports consultancy fees from Guerbet. Jack Wilkinson reports being a statistical editor for the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group. Andy Vail reports that he is a Statistical Editor of the Cochrane Gynaecology & Fertility Review Group and of the journal Reproduction. His employing institution has received payment from HFEA for his advice on review of research evidence to inform their 'traffic light' system for infertility treatment 'add-ons'. Lan Vuong reports consultancy and conference fees from Ferring, Merck and Merck Sharp and Dohme. The remaining authors declare no competing interests in relation to the present work. All authors have completed the disclosure form. 
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Not applicable.

text: Top 10 priorities for future infertility research: an international consensus development study. STUDY QUESTION: Can the priorities for future research in infertility be identified?
SUMMARY ANSWER: The top 10 research priorities for the four areas of male infertility, female and unexplained infertility, medically assisted reproduction, and ethics, access, and organization of care for people with fertility problems were identified. 
WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Many fundamental questions regarding the prevention, management, and consequences of infertility remain unanswered. This is a barrier to improving the care received by those people with fertility problems. 
STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Potential research questions were collated from an initial international survey, a systematic review of clinical practice guidelines, and Cochrane systematic reviews. A rationalized list of confirmed research uncertainties was prioritized in an interim international survey. Prioritized research uncertainties were discussed during a consensus development meeting. Using a formal consensus development method, the modified nominal group technique, diverse stakeholders identified the top 10 research priorities for each of the categories male infertility, female and unexplained infertility, medically assisted reproduction, and ethics, access, and organization of care. 
PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Healthcare professionals, people with fertility problems, and others (healthcare funders, healthcare providers, healthcare regulators, research funding bodies and researchers) were brought together in an open and transparent process using formal consensus methods advocated by the James Lind Alliance. 
MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The initial survey was completed by 388 participants from 40 countries, and 423 potential research questions were submitted. Fourteen clinical practice guidelines and 162 Cochrane systematic reviews identified a further 236 potential research questions. A rationalized list of 231 confirmed research uncertainties were entered into an interim prioritization survey completed by 317 respondents from 43 countries. The top 10 research priorities for each of the four categories male infertility, female and unexplained infertility (including age-related infertility, ovarian cysts, uterine cavity abnormalities, and tubal factor infertility), medically assisted reproduction (including ovarian stimulation, IUI, and IVF), and ethics, access, and organization of care, were identified during a consensus development meeting involving 41 participants from 11 countries. These research priorities were diverse and seek answers to questions regarding prevention, treatment, and the longer-term impact of infertility. They highlight the importance of pursuing research which has often been overlooked, including addressing the emotional and psychological impact of infertility, improving access to fertility treatment, particularly in lower resource settings, and securing appropriate regulation. Addressing these priorities will require diverse research methodologies, including laboratory-based science, qualitative and quantitative research, and population science. 
LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: We used consensus development methods, which have inherent limitations, including the representativeness of the participant sample, methodological decisions informed by professional judgement, and arbitrary consensus definitions. 
WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: We anticipate that identified research priorities, developed to specifically highlight the most pressing clinical needs as perceived by healthcare professionals, people with fertility problems, and others, will help research funding organizations and researchers to develop their future research agenda. 
STUDY FUNDING/ COMPETING INTEREST(S): The study was funded by the Auckland Medical Research Foundation, Catalyst Fund, Royal Society of New Zealand, and Maurice and Phyllis Paykel Trust. Geoffrey Adamson reports research sponsorship from Abbott, personal fees from Abbott and LabCorp, a financial interest in Advanced Reproductive Care, committee membership of the FIGO Committee on Reproductive Medicine, International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technologies, International Federation of Fertility Societies, and World Endometriosis Research Foundation, and research sponsorship of the International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technologies from Abbott and Ferring. Siladitya Bhattacharya reports being the Editor-in-Chief of Human Reproduction Open and editor for the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group. Hans Evers reports being the Editor Emeritus of Human Reproduction. Andrew Horne reports research sponsorship from the Chief Scientist's Office, Ferring, Medical Research Council, National Institute for Health Research, and Wellbeing of Women and consultancy fees from Abbvie, Ferring, Nordic Pharma, and Roche Diagnostics. M. Louise Hull reports grants from Merck, grants from Myovant, grants from Bayer, outside the submitted work and ownership in Embrace Fertility, a private fertility company. Neil Johnson reports research sponsorship from Abb-Vie and Myovant Sciences and consultancy fees from Guerbet, Myovant Sciences, Roche Diagnostics, and Vifor Pharma. José Knijnenburg reports research sponsorship from Ferring and Theramex. Richard Legro reports consultancy fees from Abbvie, Bayer, Ferring, Fractyl, Insud Pharma and Kindex and research sponsorship from Guerbet and Hass Avocado Board. Ben Mol reports consultancy fees from Guerbet, iGenomix, Merck, Merck KGaA and ObsEva. Ernest Ng reports research sponsorship from Merck. Craig Niederberger reports being the Co Editor-in-Chief of Fertility and Sterility and Section Editor of the Journal of Urology, research sponsorship from Ferring, and retains a financial interest in NexHand. Jane Stewart reports being employed by a National Health Service fertility clinic, consultancy fees from Merck for educational events, sponsorship to attend a fertility conference from Ferring, and being a clinical subeditor of Human Fertility. Annika Strandell reports consultancy fees from Guerbet. Jack Wilkinson reports being a statistical editor for the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group. Andy Vail reports that he is a Statistical Editor of the Cochrane Gynaecology & Fertility Review Group and of the journal Reproduction. His employing institution has received payment from HFEA for his advice on review of research evidence to inform their 'traffic light' system for infertility treatment 'add-ons'. Lan Vuong reports consultancy and conference fees from Ferring, Merck and Merck Sharp and Dohme. The remaining authors declare no competing interests in relation to the present work. All authors have completed the disclosure form. 
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Not applicable.

year: 2021

title: Breaking barriers and empowering perspectives: Centering women's voices in the mongrel mob wāhine toa

authors: Arnold, Annaliese

subjects: gang research

abstract: Gang communities in Aotearoa New Zealand have traditionally been sites of masculinity where specific forms of 'maleness' - including resistance to authority, antisocial behaviour, and expressions of violence - are embraced, expressed, and enforced through various internal cultural norms and reactions to the outside world. The dominant narrative that informs public perceptions of New Zealand gangs is often centered on crime, poverty, and Indigeneity. Much less is known about the role of women in these communities, particularly as their voices have only recently emerged from one of the largest gang chapters in the country. This research, conducted in close collaboration with wāhine within the Mongrel Mob Kingdom's first female-only chapter, Mongrel Mob Wāhine Toa, uses a participatory action research approach with photovoice methodology. Drawing on the personal narratives of six wāhine, this study aims to better understand their perspectives and experiences of contributing to a fledgling movement that privileges women within a predominantly male-centered gang environment. Photovoice is used alongside semi-structured interviews to provide depth and breadth to the data, allowing the wāhine to visually and verbally express their experiences and perspectives. Themes include navigating marginality, empowerment, and resistance. The long-range goal of this work is to inform context-sensitive policies and interventions for wāhine in gangs in Aotearoa. By foregrounding the perspective of wāhine, this study contributes to breaking down barriers and reshaping discourses around women in gangs, with implications for well-being and empowerment.

text: Breaking barriers and empowering perspectives: Centering women's voices in the mongrel mob wāhine toa Gang communities in Aotearoa New Zealand have traditionally been sites of masculinity where specific forms of 'maleness' - including resistance to authority, antisocial behaviour, and expressions of violence - are embraced, expressed, and enforced through various internal cultural norms and reactions to the outside world. The dominant narrative that informs public perceptions of New Zealand gangs is often centered on crime, poverty, and Indigeneity. Much less is known about the role of women in these communities, particularly as their voices have only recently emerged from one of the largest gang chapters in the country. This research, conducted in close collaboration with wāhine within the Mongrel Mob Kingdom's first female-only chapter, Mongrel Mob Wāhine Toa, uses a participatory action research approach with photovoice methodology. Drawing on the personal narratives of six wāhine, this study aims to better understand their perspectives and experiences of contributing to a fledgling movement that privileges women within a predominantly male-centered gang environment. Photovoice is used alongside semi-structured interviews to provide depth and breadth to the data, allowing the wāhine to visually and verbally express their experiences and perspectives. Themes include navigating marginality, empowerment, and resistance. The long-range goal of this work is to inform context-sensitive policies and interventions for wāhine in gangs in Aotearoa. By foregrounding the perspective of wāhine, this study contributes to breaking down barriers and reshaping discourses around women in gangs, with implications for well-being and empowerment.

year: 2025