Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T05:10:53.126Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Supporting Co-Regulation and Development of Self-Regulation Skills in Students With Intellectual Disabilities: A Scoping Review

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 September 2024

Gillian P. Andrikos*
Affiliation:
enAble Institute, Faculty of Health Sciences, Curtin University, Perth, Australia
Cindy Ann Smith
Affiliation:
School of Education, Faculty of Humanities, Curtin University, Perth, Australia
Marina Ciccarelli
Affiliation:
enAble Institute, Faculty of Health Sciences, Curtin University, Perth, Australia
*
Corresponding author: Gillian P. Andrikos; Email: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Young people with intellectual disability (ID) frequently have challenges with self-regulation that impact their success and participation in daily life. As they often require additional support with self-regulation, it is important to consider regulatory function and skill development within the context of co-regulatory interactions with caregivers. This scoping review aimed to identify factors associated with improved self-regulation and co-regulation in young people with ID. The review was conducted using Arksey and O’Malley’s (2005) framework, with 142 full-text records reviewed and critically appraised. The diverse factors that affect regulatory function in young people with ID fit within the five categories identified in the model of factors contributing to self-regulation enactment — biology, skills, motivation, caregiver support, and environmental context — highlighting the relevance of this model to regulatory function for this population. This review’s findings allow this model to be refined further for young people with ID, identifying the unique factors contributing to self-regulation enactment for this population and intervention characteristics that may support regulatory function for these individuals.

Type
Literature Review
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided that no alterations are made and the original article is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained prior to any commercial use and/or adaptation of the article.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Australian Association of Special Education

Self-regulation is the process by which an individual independently monitors, directs, and adjusts their thoughts, attention, emotions, and behaviours to reach a desired goal or match the demands and social expectations of the contexts in which they function (Nader-Grosbois, Reference Nader-Grosbois2011). Effective self-regulation supports an individual’s stability and success within their environmental context and adaptability between contexts (Szwed, Reference Szwed2016; Vieillevoye & Nader-Grosbois, Reference Vieillevoye and Nader-Grosbois2008). Executive functions (EFs), self-determination, and self-management are constructs related to self-regulation, sometimes used interchangeably. EFs are higher order processes required for self-regulated behaviour, often categorised as either cool EFs, which relate to cognitive processes (e.g., planning and working memory), or hot EFs, which relate to emotion and motivational systems (e.g., inhibition; Loveall et al., Reference Loveall, Conners, Tungate, Hahn and Osso2017). Self-determination is a particular form of self-regulation that relates to conscious and purposeful actions and the choices a person makes to direct the course of their own lives (Wehmeyer, Reference Wehmeyer, Agran, Hughes, Martin, Mithaug and Palmer2007). It includes a person’s abilities and opportunities to be involved in making decisions that affect them (Wehmeyer, Reference Wehmeyer, Agran, Hughes, Martin, Mithaug and Palmer2007). Self-management is the act of self-regulating behaviours using specific procedures, including self-monitoring, self-evaluation, and self-reinforcement (King-Sears & Carpenter, Reference King-Sears, Carpenter, Wehmeyer and Agran2005).

Self-regulation skills develop from birth through adulthood and are linked to a variety of important outcomes for young people, including improved wellbeing, positive social interactions, and academic achievement (Murray & Hamoudi, Reference Murray and Hamoudi2016; Szwed, Reference Szwed2016). Self-regulation skills develop through responsive interactions with caregivers who provide regulatory support and scaffolding, a process known as co-regulation (Rosanbalm & Murray, Reference Rosanbalm and Murray2017). Certain populations, including young people with intellectual disability (ID) or global developmental delay (GDD), have specific challenges with self-regulation, frequently demonstrating delays or deficits in this area compared to typically developing peers (Caplan & Baker, Reference Caplan and Baker2017; Cuskelly et al., Reference Cuskelly, Gilmore, Glenn and Jobling2016; Vieillevoye & Nader-Grosbois, Reference Vieillevoye and Nader-Grosbois2008). ID is a neurodevelopmental disorder that presents with deficits in intellectual functioning and adaptive behaviour, often co-occurring with other diagnoses such as autism and genetic syndromes (Abbeduto & McDuffie, Reference Abbeduto, McDuffie, Armstrong and Morrow2010; American Psychiatric Association, 2013). As clinical assessment can be unreliable in early childhood, children aged under 5 years with delays in intellectual functioning receive an interim diagnosis of GDD (American Psychiatric Association, 2013).

Self-regulation skills are linked to positive school outcomes for young people with disabilities and may be the most critical factor for the success of inclusive school placements (Nowell et al., Reference Nowell, Watson, Boyd and Klinger2019; Szwed, Reference Szwed2016; Westwood, Reference Westwood2003). The Australian Curriculum highlights the importance of developing self-regulation skills for all students, within the Personal and Social Capability learning continuum (Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority, 2023). Many schools target this curriculum area using social-emotional learning (SEL) programs. Although research evidence indicates effective SEL supports improved emotional wellbeing, pro-social behaviour, and academic performance for many students (Collie et al., Reference Collie, Shapka and Perry2012), these programs are designed for students with average to above average intelligence and are often not accessible for students with language impairments, learning difficulties, and regulatory challenges (BC Centre for Ability, 2016; Nowell et al., Reference Nowell, Watson, Boyd and Klinger2019). Regulatory interventions traditionally used for students with ID tend to target narrower skill sets through explicit instruction or highly individualised behaviourist approaches implemented by skilled practitioners (Embregts, Reference Embregts2000; Luber, Reference Luber2018; Wehmeyer et al., Reference Wehmeyer, Yeager, Bolding, Agran and Hughes2003). Although effective, these interventions may not be accessible to all educators, particularly those in inclusive settings who may lack training in special education pedagogy. Given the importance of co-regulatory interactions with caregivers in self-regulation skill development, it is critical to consider the needs, knowledge, and skills of educational staff supporting students with ID in schools. While students with ID in particular may benefit from interventions that incorporate co-regulation supports (BC Centre for Ability, 2016), little is known about co-regulation between students with ID, their teachers and support staff. There is also a general gap in school-based practice, with less than 10% of self-regulation interventions in primary schools incorporating co-regulation supports (Murray et al., Reference Murray, Rosanbalm and Christopoulos2016), although research highlights the importance of co-regulation supports for all students (Housman et al., Reference Housman, Denham and Cabral2018). Emerging interventions targeting emotional dysregulation in young people with autism and accompanying intellectual impairment show potential for improving emotional and behavioural regulation and strengthening co-regulation supports in the home (Beck et al., Reference Beck, Northrup, Breitenfeldt, Porton, Day, MacKenzie, Conner and Mazefsky2022). No programs available are designed specifically for students with ID in educational settings that target self-regulation skill development comprehensively by addressing emotional, behavioural, and cognitive regulation within the context of co-regulatory interactions with caregivers. A better understanding of factors affecting self-regulation and co-regulation among young people with ID is needed through synthesising relevant research findings, best practice guides and expert opinion to inform evidence-based interventions for this population.

Methods

A scoping review of the literature was done using the first five stages of Arksey and O’Malley’s (Reference Arksey and O’Malley2005) framework, with the quality of the literature also assessed (Daudt et al., Reference Daudt, van Mossel and Scott2013). Stage 1 included development of the guiding research question: What factors are associated with improved co-regulation and self-regulation for children with ID?

Search Strategy

In Stage 2, relevant studies were identified by conducting a literature search across three databases with search terms related to co-regulation, self-regulation, child, and intellectual disability. A broad, multidisciplinary database drawing on both white and grey literature was chosen (ProQuest), as well as two discipline-specific databases (CINAHL and PsycINFO), to allow for a thorough search and to capture results relevant to fields of allied health and education. Following a preliminary review of search results, the search strategy was refined to exclude terms related to specific learning disorders, transcriptional co-regulation, and dopaminergic co-regulation. The search was limited to peer-reviewed full-text English-language publications published between January 2000 and April 2022. All authors agreed on the search strategy and search terms, with the first author conducting the search and screening. The final search yielded 564 records. Duplicate records were removed, with remaining titles and abstracts screened and included if they (a) contained terms linked to co-regulation and/or self-regulation; (b) included individuals aged 0–18 years, or those of unspecified age classified as ‘children’, ‘adolescents’, ‘school-age’ or ‘youth’; and (c) included individuals with a diagnosis associated with ID, GDD, or a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.; American Psychiatric Association, 2013) classification of autism with accompanying intellectual impairment (ASD-ID). This resulted in 179 records included.

Data Screening, Extraction, and Synthesis

In Stage 3, records were selected for inclusion by reviewing the full-text and assessing their quality using JBI critical appraisal tools (JBI, n.d.), which are a suite of checklists for reviewers to evaluate the calibre and trustworthiness of published research papers and text evidence, such as opinion papers. The quality of each record reviewed was rated (1 = low to 5 = high) against JBI checklist criteria. Records were excluded if (a) the full text could not be sourced online, purchased or loaned through the university library; (b) the content was unrelated to co-regulation or self-regulation; (c) the population did not include ‘children’, ‘adolescents’, or individuals aged 0–18 years with a diagnosis of ID, GDD, or ASD-ID; or (d) the quality of reporting was assessed as low or unreliable. A total of 142 records were included in the final analysis (see Figure 1). The first author completed this phase, documenting each step in the process, and seeking support from the co-authors with decision-making for ambiguous records.

Figure 1. PRISMA Flow Diagram.

In Stage 4, quantitative and qualitative data were extracted and charted to capture study characteristics and information directly related to the research question. The model of factors contributing to self-regulation enactment was used as a conceptual framework for this review (see Figure 2; Murray et al., Reference Murray, Rosanbalm, Christopoulos and Hamoudi2015). This model examines self-regulation in context, giving consideration to personal and environmental factors influencing self-regulation across five different categories: biology, skills, motivation, caregiver support, and environmental context (Murray et al., Reference Murray, Rosanbalm, Christopoulos and Hamoudi2015). Extracted data were charted against these categories by the first author, with themes and subthemes developed inductively.

Figure 2. Factors Contributing to Self-Regulation Enactment (Murray et al., Reference Murray, Rosanbalm, Christopoulos and Hamoudi2015, p. 11).

In Stage 5, the data were analysed further and summarised to refine themes and subthemes. The research team met to discuss the appropriateness of final themes. The findings, including study characteristics and a summary of the themes, are presented as follows. Further information on the themes addressed by each record is also available in the supplementary material provided.

Findings

Study Characteristics

Of the 142 records in this scoping review, 23 were classified as text or opinion papers, according to JBI critical appraisal categories, five were qualitative studies, and 114 quantitative studies. Most research was descriptive or exploratory, with some experimental research emerging (see Figure 3). Most records (n = 84) targeted young people with ID or GDD as the primary diagnosis, with the remaining records (n = 58) including individuals with ASD-ID. Target populations included early childhood (0–3 years; n = 46), primary school aged (4–12 years; n = 101), and secondary school aged (13–18 years; n = 99), with many records including participants across multiple age groups.

Figure 3. Included Literature Based on JBI Categories (N = 142).

Themes and Subthemes

Data related to the research question were extracted from full-text records and charted against the categories biology, skills, motivation, caregiver support, and environmental context. One additional category, intervention characteristics, was included to capture data about targeted interventions for young people with ID that impacted on self-regulation and/or co-regulation. Themes and subthemes that emerged following thematic analysis are outlined in Table 1.

Table 1. Factors Affecting Co-Regulation and Self-Regulation in Young People With Intellectual Disability

Biology

Young people with ID have more challenges with self-regulation than their typically developing peers (Cuskelly et al., Reference Cuskelly, Gilmore, Glenn and Jobling2016). Many child-specific factors influence enactment of self-regulation skills, including temperament, diagnosis, and intellectual functioning (Cuskelly & Stubbins, Reference Cuskelly and Stubbins2006; Daunhauer & Fidler, Reference Daunhauer and Fidler2013a; Vieillevoye & Nader-Grosbois, Reference Vieillevoye and Nader-Grosbois2008; Zhu et al., Reference Zhu, Li, Zhan, Hu, Wu and Zhao2016). A different self-regulation profile and different patterns of skill development are apparent for young people with different diagnoses associated with ID, such as Down syndrome, fragile X syndrome (FXS), or ASD-ID (Daunhauer & Fidler, Reference Daunhauer and Fidler2013a, Reference Daunhauer and Fidler2013b; Zhu et al., Reference Zhu, Li, Zhan, Hu, Wu and Zhao2016). Intelligence seems to be important, with research generally showing positive associations between mental age or IQ and component areas of self-regulation in young people with ID (Gilmore et al., Reference Gilmore, Cuskelly and Hayes2003; McIntyre et al., Reference McIntyre, Blacher and Baker2006; Vieillevoye & Nader-Grosbois, Reference Vieillevoye and Nader-Grosbois2008), although these associations may be influenced by diagnosis or environmental context (Esbensen et al., Reference Esbensen, Hoffman, Shaffer, Patel and Jacola2021; Hauser-Cram et al., Reference Hauser-Cram, Warfield, Shonkoff, Krauss, Sayer, Upshur and Hodapp2001; Plesa Skwerer et al., Reference Plesa Skwerer, Joseph, Eggleston, Meyer and Tager-Flusberg2019). There are also clear associations between physiological processes and self-regulation in young people with ID, with sleep, pain, and physiological stress response influencing self-regulation enactment (Daunhauer & Fidler, Reference Daunhauer and Fidler2013a; Demchak & Bossert, Reference Demchak, Bossert, Wehmeyer and Agran2005; Shelton et al., Reference Shelton, Duis and Malow2020). The impact of biological sex on self-regulation is less clear, with inconsistent results reported in relation to ID as a broad construct. There are clearer links between biological sex and self-regulation for young people with ASD-ID (i.e., girls have greater challenges with emotional reactivity and maladaptive behaviour) and those with FXS (i.e., boys have greater challenges with physiological arousal, social anxiety, and behaviour; Bolourian, Reference Bolourian2018; Klusek, Reference Klusek2012; Northrup et al., Reference Northrup, Patterson and Mazefsky2021; Protic et al., Reference Protic, Aishworiya, Salcedo-Arellano, Tang, Milisavljevic, Mitrovic, Hagerman and Budimirovic2022). Chronological age influences self-regulation in complex ways. There are different periods for development of self-regulation skills in young people with ID, although aetiology may have an impact on developmental trajectory (Esbensen et al., Reference Esbensen, Hoffman, Shaffer, Patel and Jacola2021; Northrup et al., Reference Northrup, Patterson and Mazefsky2021). Key periods for growth in regulation of behaviour and emotion typically occur between the ages of 3 and 6 years (Baurain & Nader-Grosbois, Reference Baurain and Nader-Grosbois2012; Caplan & Baker, Reference Caplan and Baker2017), with regulation of behaviour and attention progressing during adolescence (Esbensen et al., Reference Esbensen, Hoffman, Shaffer, Patel and Jacola2021; Loveall et al., Reference Loveall, Conners, Tungate, Hahn and Osso2017; Plesa Skwerer et al., Reference Plesa Skwerer, Joseph, Eggleston, Meyer and Tager-Flusberg2019). Adolescence may present challenges with emotional regulation in certain populations, including those with ASD-ID (Northrup et al., Reference Northrup, Patterson and Mazefsky2021; Plesa Skwerer et al., Reference Plesa Skwerer, Joseph, Eggleston, Meyer and Tager-Flusberg2019). Behavioural regulation in children with ID is relatively stable in middle childhood (6–12 years), providing opportunities for improvement in regulation of attention and emotional reactivity (Bolourian, Reference Bolourian2018; Esbensen et al., Reference Esbensen, Hoffman, Shaffer, Patel and Jacola2021; Marquis, Reference Marquis2017; Northrup et al., Reference Northrup, Patterson and Mazefsky2021).

Skills

Diverse skills and attributes are important contributors to self-regulation and co-regulation in young people with ID, with a strong focus on socio-emotional skills, cognition, EF, and communication skills. Self-awareness and a positive perception of one’s own abilities (Hall & Theron, Reference Hall and Theron2016; Nader-Grosbois, Reference Nader-Grosbois2014); social information processing skills (Nader-Grosbois et al., Reference Nader-Grosbois, Houssa and Mazzone2013); pretend play skills and the ability to engage in self-directed leisure activity (Gilmore & Cuskelly, Reference Gilmore and Cuskelly2014; Miodrag, Reference Miodrag2009; Nader-Grosbois & Vieillevoye, Reference Nader-Grosbois and Vieillevoye2012); and selected self-determination skills such as choice-making skills, goal setting and attainment skills, and self-management skills (Luber, Reference Luber2018; Wehmeyer, Reference Wehmeyer, Agran, Hughes, Martin, Mithaug and Palmer2007) were all identified as important. Persistence (Gilmore et al., Reference Gilmore, Cuskelly and Hayes2003), cognitive skills such as problem-solving (Nader-Grosbois, Reference Nader-Grosbois2014), specific EFs including shifting and inhibition (Cuskelly & Stubbins, Reference Cuskelly and Stubbins2006; Esbensen et al., Reference Esbensen, Hoffman, Shaffer, Patel and Jacola2021), and learned coping strategies (Sullivan et al., Reference Sullivan, Helms, Bettencourt, Sutherland, Lotze, Mays, Wright and Farrell2012) are important for self-regulation and co-regulation. Despite some ambiguity about associations between language skills and regulation in young people with ID (Cuskelly et al., Reference Cuskelly, Gilmore, Glenn and Jobling2016; Cuskelly & Stubbins, Reference Cuskelly and Stubbins2006; Nader-Grosbois & Lefèvre, Reference Nader-Grosbois and Lefèvre2011; Vieillevoye & Nader-Grosbois, Reference Vieillevoye and Nader-Grosbois2008), the overwhelming opinion of experts is that communication skills are important to support adaptive self-regulation (De Schipper & Schuengel, Reference De Schipper and Schuengel2010; des Portes, Reference des Portes2020; Marquis, Reference Marquis2017; Sadler, Reference Sadler2019; Vieillevoye & Nader-Grosbois, Reference Vieillevoye and Nader-Grosbois2008).

Motivation

Intrinsic motivation is considered essential for the enactment of self-regulated behaviour and is associated with improved functioning and emotional wellbeing in young people with ID (Cuskelly et al., Reference Cuskelly, Gilmore and Carroll2013; Patrick et al., Reference Patrick, Ryan, Anderman and Kovach2004; Strnadová, Reference Strnadová2020). Developing and facilitating intrinsic motivation in this population are important to support self-regulation (Cuskelly et al., Reference Cuskelly, Gilmore and Carroll2013). Several factors external to the young person can support intrinsic motivation, including use of novel and personally meaningful activities (Foshay & Ludlow, Reference Foshay, Ludlow, Wehmeyer and Agran2005; Gilmore & Cuskelly, Reference Gilmore and Cuskelly2013; Wehmeyer & Shogren, Reference Wehmeyer and Shogren2020; Zyga et al., Reference Zyga, Russ, Meeker and Kirk2018), supporting success and a sense of self-efficacy (Gilmore & Cuskelly, Reference Gilmore and Cuskelly2013; Schunk & DiBenedetto, Reference Schunk and DiBenedetto2020), social engagement and connectedness (Gilmore & Cuskelly, Reference Gilmore and Cuskelly2013; Nader-Grosbois, Reference Nader-Grosbois2014; Patrick et al., Reference Patrick, Ryan, Anderman and Kovach2004), and autonomy-supportive interactions with caregivers (Gilmore & Cuskelly, Reference Gilmore and Cuskelly2013; Glenn & Cunningham, Reference Glenn and Cunningham2002).

Caregiver support

Caregiver–child relationships and interactions was the strongest theme after child-diagnosis, highlighting the critical contribution of caregivers to self-regulation enactment for young people with ID. Caregiver-related factors contributing to effective self-regulation and co-regulation included positive and autonomy-supportive relationships between caregivers and young people, responsive and consistent caregiver interactions, high expectations by caregivers, good caregiver self-efficacy and wellbeing, strong caregiver observation and scaffolding skills, and caregiver engagement in targeted and collaborative planning for young people across contexts (De Schipper & Schuengel, Reference De Schipper and Schuengel2010; Green & Baker, Reference Green and Baker2011; Hall & Theron, Reference Hall and Theron2016; Hauser-Cram et al., Reference Hauser-Cram, Warfield, Shonkoff, Krauss, Sayer, Upshur and Hodapp2001; King-Sears & Carpenter, Reference King-Sears, Carpenter, Wehmeyer and Agran2005; Norona & Baker, Reference Norona and Baker2014; Van der Veek et al., Reference Van der Veek, Kraaij and Garnefski2009).

Environmental context

Inclusive, responsive, and autonomy-supportive social environments that facilitate positive and supportive relationships with peers were consistently identified as critical to facilitating self-regulation in young people with ID (Gilmore & Cuskelly, Reference Gilmore and Cuskelly2014; Sullivan et al., Reference Sullivan, Helms, Bettencourt, Sutherland, Lotze, Mays, Wright and Farrell2012; Wehmeyer, Reference Wehmeyer, Agran, Hughes, Martin, Mithaug and Palmer2007). Other environmental factors important for supporting regulation included sensory input, task characteristics, and the duration, pace, timing and predictability of activities (Demchak & Bossert, Reference Demchak, Bossert, Wehmeyer and Agran2005; des Portes, Reference des Portes2020; Nader-Grosbois & Lefèvre, Reference Nader-Grosbois and Lefèvre2011). Finally, cultural background and the socioeconomic status of young people and their caregivers affect self-regulation enactment (des Portes, Reference des Portes2020; Macfarlane et al., Reference Macfarlane, Macfarlane and Mataiti2020). Young people with ID from different socioeconomic backgrounds and diverse ethnic groups differed on some constructs related to self-regulation, including self-management and self-determination (Raley et al., Reference Raley, Burke, Hagiwara, Shogren, Wehmeyer and Kurth2020; Rodgers & Lipscombe, Reference Rodgers and Lipscombe2005). Ethnicity influenced factors important for co-regulation such as caregiver perceptions, caregiver expectations, and caregiver–child interactions (Caplan & Baker, Reference Caplan and Baker2017; Macfarlane et al., Reference Macfarlane, Macfarlane and Mataiti2020), as well as how caregiver interactions shaped the child’s self-regulatory development (Caplan & Baker, Reference Caplan and Baker2017).

Intervention characteristics

Diverse interventions associated with improved self-regulation and co-regulation for young people with ID were identified in the literature, and typically addressed one or more of the five categories in Murray et al.’s (Reference Murray, Rosanbalm, Christopoulos and Hamoudi2015) model. For example, medical interventions tended to address biological factors such as sleep or pain, while explicit instruction addressed individuals’ skills. Several intervention approaches had an impact across categories, targeting the young person’s skills, motivational supports, caregiver interactions, and environmental factors. However, most interventions focused on improving the young person’s skills via rich learning opportunities and supporting caregivers to respond positively and proactively to regulatory challenges. Few interventions incorporated elements that supported caregiver wellbeing, considered environmental adjustments, or addressed autonomous motivation explicitly. There is high-quality evidence to support the efficacy of positive behaviour interventions and supports (PBIS) and self-management strategies in facilitating development of self-regulation skills in young people with ID (Embregts, Reference Embregts2000; King-Sears, Reference King-Sears2008; Kuntz & Carter, Reference Kuntz and Carter2019; Sadler, Reference Sadler2019). Technology-based supports, including software-based training packages, multimedia instruction, audio and/or visual prompting systems, electronic activity schedules, video modelling, simulation training, electronic self-management systems, augmentative and alternative communication systems, and environmental control systems, are associated with supporting independence, self-direction, skill development and intrinsic motivation in young people with ID (Douglas & Uphold, Reference Douglas and Uphold2014; Foshay & Ludlow, Reference Foshay, Ludlow, Wehmeyer and Agran2005; Gilson et al., Reference Gilson, Carter and Biggs2017; Lancioni et al., Reference Lancioni, Singh, O’Reilly, Sigafoos, Campodonico and Alberti2017). Finally, there is preliminary evidence to support using mindfulness strategies and cognitive behavioural therapy to enhance emotional wellbeing and adaptive coping strategies in young people with ID, particularly when their caregivers are involved in the intervention (Beck et al., Reference Beck, Northrup, Breitenfeldt, Porton, Day, MacKenzie, Conner and Mazefsky2022; Parent et al., Reference Parent, Birtwell, Lambright and DuBard2016; Singh et al., Reference Singh, Chan, Karazsia, McPherson and Jackman2017; te Brinke et al., Reference te Brinke, Schuiringa, Menting, Deković, Westera and de Castro2022).

Discussion

The findings of this scoping review support the relevance of Murray et al.’s (Reference Murray, Rosanbalm, Christopoulos and Hamoudi2015) model for young people with ID. Themes and subthemes identified in the literature allow this model to be refined to address the unique needs and experiences of this population and their caregivers (see Figure 4).

Figure 4. Factors Contributing to Self-Regulation Enactment for Young People With Intellectual Disability.

The impact of chronological age on self-regulation in young people with ID appears to be consistent with neurodevelopmental research in the general population, with two key periods for self-regulation development linked to significant brain plasticity in early childhood and again in adolescence (Murray et al., Reference Murray, Rosanbalm, Christopoulos and Hamoudi2015). This highlights the importance of early intervention (Baker et al., Reference Baker, Neece, Fenning, Crnic and Blacher2010; Bolourian, Reference Bolourian2018) and ongoing efforts to develop self-regulation skills in young people with ID throughout childhood and particularly into adolescence. Given the complexity of biological, skill-related, motivational, and contextual factors influencing self-regulation enactment for young people with ID, blanket approaches to intervention are unlikely to cater to individuals’ needs. Careful consideration of each young person’s unique profile and environmental context will be necessary for successful outcomes. Physical health and wellbeing are of foundational importance for young people with ID, necessitating explicit monitoring of factors such as nutritional intake, hydration, sleep, physical activity, bowel health, oral hygiene, and postural support (Demchak & Bossert, Reference Demchak, Bossert, Wehmeyer and Agran2005). Daily routines should be designed to meet individuals’ physical needs to the greatest extent possible, with health-related interventions utilised as necessary.

Caregivers have a central role in developing self-regulation skills in young people with ID, yet few regulatory interventions target caregiver skills, knowledge, expectations, and wellbeing explicitly. This is despite parents and educators of young people with ID being at higher risk of diminished wellbeing, and concerns about the training and skill levels of paid caregivers in inclusive education settings (Forlin et al., Reference Forlin, Keen and Barrett2008; Miodrag, Reference Miodrag2009; Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability, 2019). Programs targeting self-regulation for young people with ID should support caregiver wellbeing and capacity building as a priority alongside child outcomes. The broader social environment should also be considered, with inclusive environments promoted that foster connection with peers. School-based interventions should consider organisational culture, inclusive practices, staff wellbeing, and the relationships and interactions among the young person with ID, their classroom staff, and peers.

The wide range of literature, which connects specific skills and attributes to regulatory outcomes in young people with ID, supports the relevance of explicit skills instruction for these individuals and calls for the development of a targeted assessment and curriculum package aimed at developing these skills. Educators and allied health professionals who support young people with ID and their families would benefit from a comprehensive resource that allows them to assess skills relevant for self-regulation and progress the young person along a continuum in a coordinated way. An intervention of this nature would support the development of therapy plans and individualised education plans that target self-regulation for young people with ID explicitly, and support schools and organisations to ensure comprehensive planning and intervention across childhood and adolescence.

Although there is ongoing debate over the value of using external rewards with young people with ID, the findings of this review suggest externally controlled reward systems may interfere with intrinsic motivation and should only be used briefly in the initial stages of teaching a new skill (Sigafoos et al., Reference Sigafoos, Green, O’Reilly and Lancioni2020; Wehmeyer & Shogren, Reference Wehmeyer and Shogren2020). Caregivers of young people with ID should be supported to implement strategies that facilitate autonomous motivation, including use of person-centred and strengths-based approaches (Wehmeyer & Shogren, Reference Wehmeyer and Shogren2020). Self-management interventions including self-reinforcement can also be used to facilitate more autonomous motivation and support development of self-regulation skills (Cuskelly et al., Reference Cuskelly, Gilmore and Carroll2013; Embregts, Reference Embregts2000; Sigafoos et al., Reference Sigafoos, Green, O’Reilly and Lancioni2020; Wehmeyer et al., Reference Wehmeyer, Yeager, Bolding, Agran and Hughes2003).

Multiple factors identified in this scoping review reinforce the application of self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, Reference Deci and Ryan1985) in supporting self-regulation in young people with ID by meeting their individual needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness (Wehmeyer & Shogren, Reference Wehmeyer and Shogren2020). Self-determination is a particularly important construct with relevance to this population in relation to (a) the regulatory skills they possess, (b) their motivation to act in a self-regulated way, (c) the expectations and opportunities provided by caregivers, and (d) the way in which the social environment influences self-regulation enactment (Wehmeyer, Reference Wehmeyer, Agran, Hughes, Martin, Mithaug and Palmer2007; Wehmeyer & Shogren, Reference Wehmeyer and Shogren2020). A variety of interventions reported in the literature make use of self-determination strategies to support the development of self-regulation-related skills in this population (Agran et al., Reference Agran, Cavin, Wehmeyer and Palmer2006; Kuntz & Carter, Reference Kuntz and Carter2019; Luber, Reference Luber2018), suggesting that strategies to build self-determination should be included in regulatory interventions for young people with ID.

Research evidence supports the effectiveness of PBIS and self-management strategies in promoting self-regulation in young people with ID (Embregts, Reference Embregts2000; King-Sears, Reference King-Sears2008; Kuntz & Carter, Reference Kuntz and Carter2019; Sadler, Reference Sadler2019). As these approaches can be individualised and implemented across a range of contexts, they should be considered when designing interventions for this population. However, research should also continue to investigate the effectiveness of interventions incorporating mindfulness strategies, adapted cognitive behavioural therapy approaches, and technology-based supports. This variety is important to ensure interventions can be matched to the individual needs of young people with ID, the values and priorities of their families, and the diversity of their educational environments.

Limitations

The records included in this review came from a wide range of sources across three academic databases, including quantitative and qualitative research articles, opinion papers, editorials, books, and dissertations, but a hand search of journals and the reference lists of relevant literature was not performed due to time constraints. Some relevant literature may have been missed as a result. Another limitation was that a broad classification of ID was used in the search strategy rather than utilising a specific diagnosis. Although this has provided a good starting point for understanding factors influencing self-regulation enactment in young people with ID, the results of this research may be too broad to support the development of interventions for populations with more specific diagnoses. Given the findings of this review highlight the contribution of diagnosis to self-regulation, future experimental research should investigate the effectiveness of regulatory interventions across different diagnostic categories associated with ID to ensure their validity.

Conclusion

Young people with ID have challenges with self-regulation, yet no programs are available that support regulatory function and skill development comprehensively for this population. A better understanding of factors influencing self-regulation and co-regulation for young people with ID is needed to inform the development of appropriate interventions. The findings of this scoping review allow Murray et al.’s (Reference Murray, Rosanbalm, Christopoulos and Hamoudi2015) model of factors contributing to self-regulation enactment to be refined for young people with ID by identifying specific factors that impact on self-regulation enactment in this population, as well as intervention characteristics that will likely facilitate co-regulatory support and development of self-regulation skills for these individuals. This information supports a more comprehensive understanding of regulatory function and development in young people with ID and should be used to inform the creation of holistic interventions that address the identified needs of these individuals and their caregivers within the context of their natural environments. This review has identified the need for rigorous experimental research to investigate the effectiveness of interventions targeting regulatory function and skill development for this population.

Supplementary material

The supplementary material for this article can be found at https://doi.org/10.1017/jsi.2024.3

Footnotes

This manuscript was accepted under the Editorship of Umesh Sharma.

References

Abbeduto, L., & McDuffie, A. (2010). Genetic syndromes associated with intellectual disabilities. In Armstrong, C. L. & Morrow, L. (Eds.), Handbook of medical neuropsychology: Applications of cognitive neuroscience (pp. 193221). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1364-7_11 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Agran, M., Cavin, M., Wehmeyer, M., & Palmer, S. (2006). Participation of students with moderate to severe disabilities in the general curriculum: The effects of the self-determined learning model of instruction. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 31(3), 230241. https://doi.org/10.1177/154079690603100303 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425596 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arksey, H., & O’Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: Towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 1932. https://doi.org/10.1080/1364557032000119616 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority. (2023). Understand this general capability: Personal and social capability. https://v9.australiancurriculum.edu.au/teacher-resources/understand-this-general-capability/personal-and-social-capability Google Scholar
Baker, B. L., Neece, C. L., Fenning, R. M., Crnic, K. A., & Blacher, J. (2010). Mental disorders in five-year-old children with or without developmental delay: Focus on ADHD. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 39(4), 492505. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2010.486321 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baurain, C., & Nader-Grosbois, N. (2012). Socio-emotional regulation in children with intellectual disability and typically developing children in interactive contexts. ALTER, European Journal of Disability Research, 6(2), 7593. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.alter.2012.02.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BC Centre for Ability. (2016). Clinical perspectives: Adapting school wide self-regulation curricula for students with special needs. https://bc-cfa.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/adapting-school-wide-self-regulation-curricula-for-students-with-special-needs.pdf Google Scholar
Beck, K. B., Northrup, J. B., Breitenfeldt, K. E., Porton, S., Day, T. N., MacKenzie, K. T., Conner, C. M., & Mazefsky, C. A. (2022). Stakeholder informed development of the Emotion Awareness and Skills Enhancement team–based program (EASE-Teams). Autism, 26(3), 586600. https://doi.org/10.1177/13623613211061936 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bolourian, Y. R. (2018). Co-occurring behavior problems in youth with intellectual and developmental disabilities: A developmental perspective (Publication No. 13419208) [Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Riverside]. APA PsycInfo.Google Scholar
Caplan, B., & Baker, B. L. (2017). Maternal control and early child dysregulation: Moderating roles of ethnicity and child delay status. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 61(2), 115129. https://doi.org/10.1111/jir.12280 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Collie, R. J., Shapka, J. D., & Perry, N. E. (2012). School climate and social–emotional learning: Predicting teacher stress, job satisfaction, and teaching efficacy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(4), 11891204. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029356 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cuskelly, M., Gilmore, L., & Carroll, A. (2013). Self-regulation and mastery motivation in individuals with developmental disabilities: Barriers, supports, and strategies. In K. C. Barrett, N. A. Fox, G. A. Morgan, D. J. Fidler, & L. A. Daunhauer (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulatory processes in development: New directions and international perspectives (pp. 381–402). Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203080719-19 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cuskelly, M., Gilmore, L., Glenn, S., & Jobling, A. (2016). Delay of gratification: A comparison study of children with Down syndrome, moderate intellectual disability and typical development. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 60(9), 865873. https://doi.org/10.1111/jir.12262 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cuskelly, M., & Stubbins, P. (2006). Self-imposed delay of gratification in adolescents with Down syndrome. Journal on Developmental Disabilities, 12(1, Suppl. 2), 1928. https://oadd.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/cuskelly_stubbins.pdf Google Scholar
Daudt, H. M. L., van Mossel, C., & Scott, S. J. (2013). Enhancing the scoping study methodology: A large, inter-professional team’s experience with Arksey and O’Malley’s framework. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 13, Article 48. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-13-48 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daunhauer, L. A., & Fidler, D. J. (2013a). Executive functioning in individuals with Down syndrome. In K. C. Barrett, N. A. Fox, G. A. Morgan, D. J. Fidler, & L. A. Daunhauer (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulatory processes in development: New directions and international perspectives (pp. 453–472). Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203080719-24 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daunhauer, L. A., & Fidler, D. J. (2013b). Introduction to section four: Overview and analysis. In K. C. Barrett, N. A. Fox, G. A. Morgan, D. J. Fidler, & L. A. Daunhauer (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulatory processes in development: New directions and international perspectives (pp. 405–407). Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203080719-21 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Plenum Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-2271-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Demchak, M. A., & Bossert, K. W. (2005). Assessing problem behaviors. In Wehmeyer, M. L. & Agran, M. (Eds.), Mental retardation and intellectual disabilities: Teaching students using innovative and research-based strategies (pp. 127148). Pearson Custom Publishing.Google Scholar
De Schipper, J. C., & Schuengel, C. (2010). Attachment behaviour towards support staff in young people with intellectual disabilities: Associations with challenging behaviour. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 54(7), 584596. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2788.2010.01288.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
des Portes, V. (2020). Intellectual disability. In A. Gallagher, C. Bulteau, D. Cohen, & J. L. Michaud (Eds.), Handbook of clinical neurology: Vol. 174. Neurocognitive development: Disorders and disabilities (pp. 113–126). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-64148-9.00009-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Douglas, K. H., & Uphold, N. M. (2014). iPad® or iPod Touch®: Evaluating self-created electronic photographic activity schedules and student preferences. Journal of Special Education Technology, 29(3), 114. https://doi.org/10.1177/016264341402900301 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Embregts, P. J. C. M. (2000). Effectiveness of video feedback and self-management on inappropriate social behavior of youth with mild mental retardation. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 21(5), 409423. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0891-4222(00)00052-4 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Esbensen, A. J., Hoffman, E. K., Shaffer, R. C., Patel, L. R., & Jacola, L. M. (2021). Relationship between parent and teacher reported executive functioning and maladaptive behaviors in children with Down syndrome. American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 126(4), 307323. https://doi.org/10.1352/1944-7558-126.4.307 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Forlin, C., Keen, M., & Barrett, E. (2008). The concerns of mainstream teachers: Coping with inclusivity in an Australian context. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 55(3), 251264. https://doi.org/10.1080/10349120802268396 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foshay, J. D., & Ludlow, B. L. (2005). Implementing computer-mediated supports and assistive technology. In Wehmeyer, M. L. & Agran, M. (Eds.), Mental retardation and intellectual disabilities: Teaching students using innovative and research-based strategies (pp. 101126). Pearson Custom Publishing.Google Scholar
Gilmore, L., & Cuskelly, M. (2013). Mastery motivation in children with Down syndrome: Promoting and sustaining interest in learning. In R. Faragher & B. Clarke (Eds.), Educating learners with Down syndrome: Research, theory, and practice with children and adolescents (pp. 60–82). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315883588 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilmore, L., & Cuskelly, M. (2014). Vulnerability to loneliness in people with intellectual disability: An explanatory model. Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities, 11(3), 192199. https://doi.org/10.1111/jppi.12089 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilmore, L., Cuskelly, M., & Hayes, A. (2003). Self-regulatory behaviors in children with Down syndrome and typically developing children measured using the Goodman Lock Box. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 24(2), 95108. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0891-4222(03)00012-X CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gilson, C. B., Carter, E. W., & Biggs, E. E. (2017). Systematic review of instructional methods to teach employment skills to secondary students with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 42(2), 89107. https://doi.org/10.1177/1540796917698831 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glenn, S., & Cunningham, C. (2002). Self-regulation in children and young people with Down syndrome. In M. Cuskelly, A. Jobling, & S. Buckley (Eds.), Down syndrome across the life span (pp. 28–39). Whurr Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470777886.ch3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, S., & Baker, B. (2011). Parents’ emotion expression as a predictor of child’s social competence: Children with or without intellectual disability. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 55(3), 324338. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2788.2010.01363.x CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hall, A.-M., & Theron, L. C. (2016). Resilience processes supporting adolescents with intellectual disability: A multiple case study. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 54(1), 4562. https://doi.org/10.1352/1934-9556-54.1.45 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hauser-Cram, P., Warfield, M. E., Shonkoff, J. P., Krauss, M. W., Sayer, A., Upshur, C. C., & Hodapp, R. M. (2001). Children with disabilities: A longitudinal study of child development and parent well-being. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 66(3), i126. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3181571 Google ScholarPubMed
Housman, D. K., Denham, S. A., & Cabral, H. (2018). Building young children’s emotional competence and self-regulation from birth: The begin toECSEL approach. International Journal of Emotional Education, 10(2), 525. ’https://www.researchgate.net/publication/329372342_Building_Young_Children’s_Emotional_Competence_and_SelfRegulation_from_Birth_The_begin_toECSEL_approach Google Scholar
JBI. (n.d.). Critical appraisal tools. https://jbi.global/critical-appraisal-tools Google Scholar
King-Sears, M. E. (2008). Using teacher and researcher data to evaluate the effects of self-management in an inclusive classroom. Preventing School Failure, 52(4), 2536. https://doi.org/10.3200/PSFL.52.4.25-36 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King-Sears, M. E., & Carpenter, S. L. (2005). Teaching self-management to elementary students with developmental disabilities. In Wehmeyer, M. L. & Agran, M. (Eds.), Mental retardation and intellectual disabilities: Teaching students using innovative and research-based strategies (pp. 235254). Pearson Custom Publishing.Google Scholar
Klusek, J. (2012). Pragmatic language in autism and fragile X syndrome: Links with physiological arousal and anxiety [Doctoral dissertation, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill]. ProQuest. https://doi.org/10.17615/n8n8-g904 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuntz, E. M., & Carter, E. W. (2019). Review of interventions supporting secondary students with intellectual disability in general education classes. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 44(2), 103121. https://doi.org/10.1177/1540796919847483 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lancioni, G. E., Singh, N. N., O’Reilly, M. F., Sigafoos, J., Campodonico, F., & Alberti, G. (2017). Assistive technology. In K. A. Shogren, M. L. Wehmeyer, & N. N. Singh (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology in intellectual and developmental disabilities: Translating research into practice (pp. 261–284). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-59066-0_18 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loveall, S. J., Conners, F. A., Tungate, A. S., Hahn, L. J., & Osso, T. D. (2017). A cross-sectional analysis of executive function in Down syndrome from 2 to 35 years. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 61(9), 877887. https://doi.org/10.1111/jir.12396 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Luber, J. (2018). Effects of PEER-DM on self-determination in adolescents with intellectual and developmental disabilities (Publication No. 10835811) [Doctoral dissertation, St. John’s University]. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.Google Scholar
Macfarlane, A., Macfarlane, S., & Mataiti, H. (2020). Cultural and sociocultural influences and learners with special needs. In A. J. Martin, R. A. Sperling, & K. J. Newton (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology and students with special needs (pp. 602–624). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315100654-28 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marquis, W. A. S. (2017). A longitudinal perspective on parent-child conflict and conflict resolution in youth with or without developmental disability (Publication No. 10620310) [Doctoral dissertation, University of California]. ProQuest.Google Scholar
McIntyre, L. L., Blacher, J., & Baker, B. L. (2006). The transition to school: Adaptation in young children with and without intellectual disability. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 50(5), 349361. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2788.2006.00783.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miodrag, N. (2009). Psychological well-being in parents of children with autism and Down syndrome [Doctoral dissertation, McGill University]. APA PsycInfo.Google Scholar
Murray, D. W., & Hamoudi, A. (2016). A brief on self-regulation and toxic stress: How do acute and chronic stress impact the development of self-regulation? (OPRE Report 2016-83). Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. https://fpg.unc.edu/sites/fpg.unc.edu/files/resources/reports-and-policy-briefs/HowDoAcuteChronicStressImpactDevelopment.pdf Google Scholar
Murray, D. W., Rosanbalm, K., & Christopoulos, C. (2016). Self-regulation and toxic stress report 3: A comprehensive review of self-regulation interventions from birth through young adulthood (OPRE Report 2016-34). Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. https://www.acf.hhs.gov/opre/report/self-regulation-and-toxic-stress-report-3-comprehensive-review-self-regulation Google Scholar
Murray, D. W., Rosanbalm, K., Christopoulos, C., & Hamoudi, A. (2015). Self-regulation and toxic stress report 1: Foundations for understanding self-regulation from an applied developmental perspective (OPRE Report 2015-21). Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. https://www.acf.hhs.gov/opre/report/self-regulation-and-toxic-stress-foundations-understanding-self-regulation-applied Google Scholar
Nader-Grosbois, N. (2011). Self-regulation, dysregulation, emotion regulation and their impact on cognitive and socio-emotional abilities in children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorders. In T. Williams (Ed.), Autism spectrum disorders: From genes to environment (pp. 243–286). InTechOpen. https://doi.org/10.5772/20070 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nader-Grosbois, N. (2014). Self-perception, self-regulation and metacognition in adolescents with intellectual disability. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 35(6), 13341348. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2014.03.033 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nader-Grosbois, N., Houssa, M., & Mazzone, S. (2013). How could theory of mind contribute to the differentiation of social adjustment profiles of children with externalizing behavior disorders and children with intellectual disabilities? Research in Developmental Disabilities, 34(9), 26422660. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2013.05.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nader-Grosbois, N., & Lefèvre, N. (2011). Self-regulation and performance in problem-solving using physical materials or computers in children with intellectual disability. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 32(5), 14921505. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2011.01.020 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nader-Grosbois, N., & Vieillevoye, S. (2012). Variability of self-regulatory strategies in children with intellectual disability and typically developing children in pretend play situations. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 56(2), 140156. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2788.2011.01443.x CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Norona, A. N., & Baker, B. L. (2014). The transactional relationship between parenting and emotion regulation in children with or without developmental delays. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 35(12), 32093216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2014.07.048 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Northrup, J. B., Patterson, M. T., & Mazefsky, C. A. (2021). Predictors of severity and change in emotion dysregulation among children and adolescents with ASD. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 50(6), 708729. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2021.1955369 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nowell, S. W., Watson, L. R., Boyd, B., & Klinger, L. G. (2019). Efficacy study of a social communication and self-regulation intervention for school-age children with autism spectrum disorder: A randomized controlled trial. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 50(3), 416433. https://doi.org/10.1044/2019_LSHSS-18-0093 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Parent, V., Birtwell, K. B., Lambright, N., & DuBard, M. (2016). Combining CBT and behavior-analytic approaches to target severe emotion dysregulation in verbal youth with ASD and ID. Journal of Mental Health Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 9(1–2), 6082. https://doi.org/10.1080/19315864.2016.1166301 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patrick, H., Ryan, A. M., Anderman, E. M., & Kovach, J. (2004). Toward inclusion across disciplines: Understanding motivation of exceptional students. In H. N. Switzky (Ed.), International review of research in mental retardation: Vol. 28. Personality and motivational systems in mental retardation (pp. 191–224). Elsevier Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0074-7750(04)28006-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plesa Skwerer, D., Joseph, R. M., Eggleston, B., Meyer, S. R., & Tager-Flusberg, H. (2019). Prevalence and correlates of psychiatric symptoms in minimally verbal children and adolescents with ASD. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 10, Article 43. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00043 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Protic, D. D., Aishworiya, R., Salcedo-Arellano, M. J., Tang, S. J., Milisavljevic, J., Mitrovic, F., Hagerman, R. J., & Budimirovic, D. B. (2022). Fragile X syndrome: From molecular aspect to clinical treatment. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 23(4), Article 1935. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms23041935 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raley, S. K., Burke, K. M., Hagiwara, M., Shogren, K. A., Wehmeyer, M. L., & Kurth, J. A. (2020). The self-determined learning model of instruction and students with extensive support needs in inclusive settings. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 58(1), 8290. https://doi.org/10.1352/1934-9556-58.1.82 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rodgers, J., & Lipscombe, J. (2005). The nature and extent of help given to women with intellectual disabilities to manage menstruation. Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability, 30(1), 4552. https://doi.org/10.1080/13668250500033094 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosanbalm, K. D., & Murray, D. W. (2017). Co-regulation from birth through young adulthood: A practice brief (OPRE Brief 2017-80). Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. https://fpg.unc.edu/sites/fpg.unc.edu/files/resources/reports-and-policy-briefs/Co-RegulationFromBirthThroughYoungAdulthood.pdf Google Scholar
Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability. (2019). Issues paper: Education and learning. https://disability.royalcommission.gov.au/publications/education Google Scholar
Sadler, K. M. (2019). Video self-modeling and functional behavior assessment to modify aggressive behaviors in students with autism spectrum disorder and intellectual disabilities. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 54(4), 406419. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26822517 Google Scholar
Schunk, D. H., & DiBenedetto, M. K. (2020). Social cognitive theory, self-efficacy, and students with disabilities: Implications for students with learning disabilities, reading disabilities, and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. In A. J. Martin, R. A. Sperling, & K. J. Newton (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology and students with special needs (pp. 243–261). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315100654-13 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shelton, A. R., Duis, J., & Malow, B. (2020). Neurodevelopmental disorders. In A. Chopra, P. Das, & K. Doghramji (Eds.), Management of sleep disorders in psychiatry (pp. 387–401). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/med/9780190929671.003.0023 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sigafoos, J., Green, V. A., O’Reilly, M. F., & Lancioni, G. E. (2020). Developmental disability. In A. J. Martin, R. A. Sperling, & K. J. Newton (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology and students with special needs (pp. 173–196). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315100654-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singh, N. N., Chan, J., Karazsia, B. T., McPherson, C. L., & Jackman, M. M. (2017). Tele-health training of teachers to teach a mindfulness-based procedure for self-management of aggressive behavior to students with intellectual and developmental disabilities. International Journal of Developmental Disabilities, 63(4), 195203. https://doi.org/10.1080/20473869.2016.1277841 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strnadová, I. (2020). The importance of self-determination and inclusion for students with intellectual disability: What we know and what we still need to discover. In A. J. Martin, R. A. Sperling, & K. J. Newton (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology and students with special needs (pp. 75–94). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315100654-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sullivan, T. N., Helms, S. W., Bettencourt, A. F., Sutherland, K., Lotze, G. M., Mays, S., Wright, S., & Farrell, A. D. (2012). A qualitative study of individual and peer factors related to effective nonviolent versus aggressive responses to problem situations among adolescents with high incidence disabilities. Behavioral Disorders, 37(3), 163178. https://doi.org/10.1177/019874291203700304 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Szwed, K. L. (2016). Self-regulation to practice: Incorporating the strategy to an early childhood special education setting (Publication No. 10151557) [Doctoral dissertation, Purdue University]. ProQuest.Google Scholar
te Brinke, L. W., Schuiringa, H. D., Menting, A. T. A., Deković, M., Westera, J. J., & de Castro, B. O. (2022). Treatment approach and sequence effects in cognitive behavioral therapy targeting emotion regulation among adolescents with externalizing problems and intellectual disabilities. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 46(2), 302318. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-021-10261-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van der Veek, S. M. C., Kraaij, V., & Garnefski, N. (2009). Down or up? Explaining positive and negative emotions in parents of children with Down’s syndrome: Goals, cognitive coping, and resources. Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability, 34(3), 216229. https://doi.org/10.1080/13668250903093133 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vieillevoye, S., & Nader-Grosbois, N. (2008). Self-regulation during pretend play in children with intellectual disability and in normally developing children. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 29(3), 256272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2007.05.003 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wehmeyer, M. L. (with Agran, M., Hughes, C., Martin, J. E., Mithaug, D. E., & Palmer, S. B.) (2007). Promoting self-determination in students with developmental disabilities. The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Wehmeyer, M. L., & Shogren, K. A. (2020). Self-determination and autonomous motivation: Implications for students with intellectual, developmental, and specific learning disabilities. In A. J. Martin, R. A. Sperling, & K. J. Newton (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology and students with special needs (pp. 262–291). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315100654-14 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wehmeyer, M. L., Yeager, D., Bolding, N., Agran, M., & Hughes, C. (2003). The effects of self-regulation strategies on goal attainment for students with developmental disabilities in general education classrooms. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 15(1), 7991. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021408405270 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Westwood, P. S. (2003). Commonsense methods for children with special educational needs: Strategies for the regular classroom (4th ed.). RoutledgeFalmer. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203643303 Google Scholar
Zhu, Z., Li, W., Zhan, J., Hu, L., Wu, L., & Zhao, Z. (2016). Adaptive behaviour of Chinese boys with fragile X syndrome. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 60(1), 18. https://doi.org/10.1111/jir.12222 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zyga, O., Russ, S. W., Meeker, H., & Kirk, J. (2018). A preliminary investigation of a school-based musical theater intervention program for children with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Intellectual Disabilities, 22(3), 262278. https://doi.org/10.1177/1744629517699334 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Figure 0

Figure 1. PRISMA Flow Diagram.

Figure 1

Figure 2. Factors Contributing to Self-Regulation Enactment (Murray et al., 2015, p. 11).

Figure 2

Figure 3. Included Literature Based on JBI Categories (N = 142).

Figure 3

Table 1. Factors Affecting Co-Regulation and Self-Regulation in Young People With Intellectual Disability

Figure 4

Figure 4. Factors Contributing to Self-Regulation Enactment for Young People With Intellectual Disability.

Supplementary material: File

Andrikos et al. supplementary material

Andrikos et al. supplementary material
Download Andrikos et al. supplementary material(File)
File 749.6 KB