「精神遅滞」定義における「適応行動」 : 適応行動尺度の開発とその帰結

IR Web Site Open Access

Bibliographic Information

Other Title
  • 「精神遅滞」定義における「適応行動」─適応行動尺度の開発とその帰結─
  • 「 セイシン チタイ 」 テイギ ニ オケル 「 テキオウ コウドウ 」 : テキオウ コウドウ シャクド ノ カイハツ ト ソノ キケツ
  • The Definition of Mental Retardation and Adaptive Behavior : The development of adaptive behavior scales and their consequences

Search this article

Abstract

Before intellectual tests were introduce to the field of mental retardation, persons with intellectual disability were usually described as “social incompetent” who were incapable to adapt to the demands of everyday life. AAMD mental retardation manual, however, defined for the first time that a person should be subaverage in general intellectual functioning and should evidence impairment in adaptive behavior before being diagnosed as mentally retarded. This definition reflected concerns over IQ tests. In spite of AAMD manual’s dual criterion, however, there was not reliable and valid instrument to assess adaptive behavior. So, Leland, H. et al. took charge of the development of AAMD Adaptive Scale which was completed in1969. He made efforts to make clear adaptive behavior to find that mental retardation was a social concept. His research efforts of adaptive behavior made him to believe that mental retardation is adequately understood in social contexts. In 1970s a concern arouses about “six hour retarded children” or minority group and low socioeconomic status children who were labeled as retarded in the public schools but exhibited adequate adaptive behavior at home and in the community. This concern made many researchers to disagree with the use of IQs only to identify children with mental retardation. Those researchers affirmed that a person’s social competence or adaptive behavior should be the most important criterion for mental retardation. Thus, in the 1980’s people witnessed a great number of checklist and scales of adaptive behavior. Though adaptive behavior assessment has become activated, some researcher criticized its shortcomings, The critics affirmed that adaptive behavior information was too vague and questionable. Actually IQ has retained dominance in identification and classification procedures of mental retardation. Zigler et al. (1986) even proposed that mental retardation should be defined solely by subaverage performance on measured intellectual abilities. In the other hand, Greenspan S.(1981) asserted the dual criterion of mental retardation by subaverage intelligence and low adaptive behavior has not succeeded in satisfying critics, and the construct of adaptive behavior was devised in the absence of a model competence. His new definition of mental retardation is based on “social competence” or “personal competence” which is composed with “practical intelligence”, “conceptual intelligence” and “social intelligence”

Journal

Related Projects

See more

Keywords

Details 詳細情報について

Report a problem

Back to top