How to support peer resistance in adolescents with mild-to-borderline intellectual disability? Intervention development and feasibility

Eline Wagemaker; Elske Salemink; Hilde M Huizenga; Han F Bart; Tycho J Dekkers; Anika Bexkens

doi:10.1111/jar.13216

How to support peer resistance in adolescents with mild-to-borderline intellectual disability? Intervention development and feasibility

J Appl Res Intellect Disabil. 2024 May;37(3):e13216. doi: 10.1111/jar.13216.

Authors

Eline Wagemaker^{1

2}, Elske Salemink³, Hilde M Huizenga^{1

2

4}, Han F Bart^{5

6}, Tycho J Dekkers^{1

7

8

9

10}, Anika Bexkens^{11

12}

Affiliations

¹ Department of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
² Research Priority Area Yield, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
³ Department of Clinical Psychology, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
⁴ Amsterdam Brain and Cognition, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
⁵ De Viaan, Practical Vocational School, Alkmaar, The Netherlands.
⁶ SOVON (Public Secondary Education Foundation), Noord-Holland-Noord, The Netherlands.
⁷ Levvel, Academic Center of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Specialized Youthcare, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
⁸ Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
⁹ Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
¹⁰ Accare Child Study Center, Groningen, The Netherlands.
¹¹ Department of Psychology, Developmental and Educational Psychology, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands.
¹² GGZ Delfland, Delft, The Netherlands.

PMID: 38403300
DOI: 10.1111/jar.13216

Abstract

Background: Adolescents with mild-to-borderline intellectual disability face peer resistance challenges, risking harmful or dangerous situations.

Method: We designed a peer resistance group intervention at school for adolescents with mild-to-borderline intellectual disability, tested its feasibility (N = 4, M_age = 14.1, M_IQ = 78.8), adapted it, and tested it again (N = 6, M_age = 15.0, M_IQ = 72.8).

Results: Study 1 demonstrated feasibility in recruitment, resources, and potential benefits on the distal outcome risk taking. However, attendance, obtained knowledge, and potential benefits on peer resistance, peer problems, and prosocial behaviour were suboptimal. Consequently, study 2 contained more learning by doing and individual lessons, resulting in higher attendance and greater personalization. While potential benefits on improved peer resistance measures were not observed, risk taking improved.

Conclusions: Despite finding no potential benefits on peer resistance, running a peer resistance intervention for adolescents with mild-to-borderline intellectual disability at school is considered feasible.

Keywords: adolescence; feasibility; intervention development; mild-to-borderline intellectual disability; peer resistance.

MeSH terms

Adolescent
Feasibility Studies
Humans
Intellectual Disability*
Interpersonal Relations
Learning Disabilities*
Peer Group