Bagatell,

N., Mirigliani, G., Patterson, C., Reyes, Y., & Test, L. (2010). Effectiveness of

therapy ball chairs on classroom participation in children with autism

spectrum disorders. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 64, 895-903.

Retrieved March 25, 2018.

In California researchers conducted a study to evaluate the effectiveness of

therapy ball chairs in a special education classroom. Six students that had been

diagnosed with ASD (autism spectrum disorder) participated in the study. They

attended a large urban school district in California. Students were in kindergarten

through first grade. The study was in the form of A-B-C meaning first students were

observed sitting in regular chairs. Part B students were observed using ball chairs,

and part C students were given the choice to sit in a ball chair or regular chair. The

study lasted for four weeks and observed for 16 minutes in the morning during

circle/calendar time. The purpose of the study was to see if therapy ball chairs

increased student engagement for students with sensory processing disorders. The

study showed mixed results and led towards therapy ball chairs being ineffective for

increasing student engagement.

The outline of the study was clear and concise. The authors went into great

detail on the background, the purpose, and the teacher’s problem of practice before

describing the set-up of the study. The authors also explained the importance of

social validity in this research study. It was important to mention the role of the

teachers and paraprofessionals along with their perceptions of the study. The data

was taken through observations with a camera that was set-up in the classroom
along with rating scales based on frequency of behaviors ranging from never to

always. At the end of the study the authors noted a need for more research to come

to a firm conclusion of the effectiveness of therapy balls for students with sensory

processing disorder. Authors also gave ideas for further research.

I was surprised by the results of this study. The results showed to be mixed

and leaned towards ineffectiveness, which is not what I expected. The study only

showed positive results for one student, the other five results in ineffectiveness.

This is causing me to think that therapy ball chairs may not be an effective

intervention to help with focus during academic activities, but could still be an

effective sensory intervention during sensorimotor time. The results are changing

my mindset and attitude towards my topic in the sense that sensory interventions

should be an intervention during a particular sensory time. I will continue to

research these results further.

Burgoyne, M. E., & Ketcham, C. J. (2015). Observation of classroom performance

using therapy balls as a substitute for chairs in elementary school

children. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 3(4), 42-48. Retrieved

March 23, 2018.

Two women researched the effectiveness of therapy balls instead of regular

chairs in the elementary setting. The study involved 19 second-graders in an

elementary school in North Carolina. The students were observed by three

researchers during the day for one hour. Behaviors that were observed included:

academic task (on/off), effort level, attitude, intensity level of participation, seated

behaviors (rocking/bouncing/stationary/other), and interactions. The study

consisted of three different observation times throughout one semester. First

students were observed using regular chairs, second observed using therapy balls

and third observed again using therapy balls with slight modifications. Results

showed a significant increase in on task behaviors. 85% of students in the class

were on task for the entire hour when using therapy balls, compared to on task

behavior without therapy balls was 49% of students. The use of therapy balls in an

elementary classroom allows students sensory input so they are able to focus more

easily, compared to students having to create their own sensory input in a regular

chair, which leads to more interruptive behaviors.

The researchers had a great layout to their study. The article included helpful

graphs and charts. The researchers included the observation sheet containing

definitions for particular behaviors. There is room for questions, because they did
not list what type of students they were observing. The article did not state if any

students had learning exceptionalities or learning disabilities. The article gave a

helpful explanation as to what sensory means for all students and why therapy balls

can help with input for students with sensory needs. More research is needed to

determine if the effectiveness would be the same for special needs students and

older students.

This article helped my research by defining what sensory means. It also was

helpful because it elaborated on one particular sensory intervention that has been

researched and shown to be effective. This article did not change my attitude

towards sensory, it did show me that sensory interventions are helpful to all

students, not just students with special needs. The article also helped my research

by giving an example on how to complete observations to record data.

Carter, Mark, & Stephenson (2011). The use of multi-sensory environments in

schools servicing children with severe disabilities. Journal of Development of

Physical Disabilities, 24, 95–109. Retrieved April 4, 2018.

Researchers conducted a study on the use of multi-sensory environments

(MSE) in schools for children with severe disabilities. The study consisted of

researchers analyzing about 50 questionnaires given to various government special

schools servicing children with severe intellectual disabilities. Surveys were divided

into about 10 sections addressing the background of the school, history and funding

of the MSE, equipment in the MSE, how staff was trained using the MSE, uses of the

MSE, and the benefits and problems of the MSE. Results showed that the majority of

schools were using the MSE’s without proper training and that the rooms were

getting used only 1-2 times per week on average. The purpose of the MSE is to

provide students with a space to get sensory stimulation through visual, auditory,

tactile equipment. All schools stated that the purpose of a MSE is either to provide

students with an enjoyable experience of a way to calm and relax anxious students.

The study listed many benefits and problems. A few problems are lack of funding,

training, and difficulty supervising the students in the MSE.

This article provided a different outlook on multi-sensory environments.

Authors stated many problems along with benefits to these special rooms. The

information inside this article was helpful, but the authors did not outline the study

very well. They did not state how they analyzed the questionnaires to collect and

summarize the data. Both of the authors of this article are researchers and
conducted this study for the Future Fund grant, to receive funding for multi-sensory

environments.

I found this article very helpful. The authors defined what exactly a multi-

sensory environment is well and they also defined the importance in these rooms

well. The article lacked a lot of research, which in turn supported my topic, because

very little research on this topic exists. Sensory interventions have the potential to

be very beneficial to students if they are completed in the correct format and if

research is conducted first. This article completely supported the importance in this

research I am conducting.

Dawson, G., & Watling, R. (2000). Interventions to facilitate auditory, visual, and

motor integrations in autism: A review of the evidence. Journal of Autism and

Developmental Disorders, 30(5), 415-421. Retrieved January 31, 2018.

Dawson and Walting both from the University of Washington in Seattle

conducted a research study on autistic children with sensory and motor

abnormalities. They set up an intervention using auditory therapy. Occupational

therapists conducted the intervention with the autistic students. The students

listened to music through headphones for 30 minutes twice a day for 10 days. The

behaviors observed seemed to be more calm after having listened to the music and

after filing out a questionnaire their parents reported having noticed happier

behaviors at home. The intervention also showed that there were improvements in

behavior from the students after having received auditory integration compared to

the control group. More research is needed to evaluate if this effectiveness is

consistent and what time of the day this music therapy intervention should be

occurring.

This article took an interesting perspective on sensory input issues with

autistic children. The sample size in the study was very small, about six students,

which is questionable. Further research is needed to know if more students would

benefits from this intervention and if the findings are accurate. The article also

mentioned that this topic is not well validated but there is a need for more research

in the future, because sensory issues are becoming more problematic in classrooms.
 This article was beneficial to my research topic. The two researchers

conducted a specific intervention study to calm behaviors. This supports my

research topic and also gave me more references to help continue my research

process. The article did not change my point of view on the topic. I also found it

helpful that the intervention left a positive effect on the child lasting for longer than

the intervention itself. This showed a truly positive experience for the students

receiving the intervention.

Kalimullin, A. M., Kuvaldina, E. A., & Koinova-Zoellner, J. (2016). Adolescents' self-

regulation development via the sensory room system. International Journal of

Environmental & Science Education, 11(5), 663-671. Retrieved January 30,

2018.

Three researchers studied the effects of teaching self-regulation via the

sensory room. A sensory room is a small room containing a variety of sensory

objects. The room in the study was dark, with lighting provided by stars formed into

constellations, peaceful music played in the background, various styles of chairs,

various therapeutic balls, and other sensory type objects. The sample subjects were

50 students in 7th grade. They were taught eight different lessons on how to self-

regulate. The lessons focused around how to properly use the equipment in the

room to self-regulate, while also teaching students to focus on tactile senses and

relaxation. Results showed that by the end students were able to successfully self-

regulate in the comfortable and relaxing environment the sensory room created for

them.

This article was helpful, but it would have been more helpful to me if the

authors had stated what type of learners the sample subjects were. It did not state if

any students had learning disabilities or exceptionalities. The article also did not

state how long the lessons were, it only stated that there were eight lessons taught.

The researchers should have gone into more specific details about what exactly the

sensory room entailed and described it more thoroughly. It would have been helpful
to know the dimensions of the room and where the location of the sensory room

was from the classroom.

Reading this research article was useful to my research. It was beneficial to

read specifically about a particular sensory room and the sensory objects inside this

room. It helped me realize, that sensory rooms are not solely for children diagnosed

with autism or other children with sensory processing disorders. Sensory rooms

and teaching self-regulation strategies are beneficial for all types of learners. All

children benefit from exploring their tactile senses and various relaxation activities

in the educational environment. This article supports my topic in the sense that

sensory rooms create relaxation ad help calm/regulate behaviors.

Lotan, M., & Gold, C. (2009). Meta-analysis of the effectiveness of individual

intervention in the controlled multisensory environment (Snoezelen) for

individuals with intellectual disability. Journal of Intellectual and

Developmental Disability, 34(3), 207-215. Retrieved March 20, 2018.

Lotan and Gold researched the effectiveness of individual intervention in a

controlled multisensory environment. All of the individuals involved in the study

were diagnosed with an intellectual disability or developmental disabilities. The

purpose of the study was to find a balance between relaxation and an activity within

framework in an adapted environment. The study evaluated various literature and

previous studies comparing the results and determining the overall effectiveness.

The average population size was about nine. Each of the intervention sessions was

between 20-40 minutes long with an average of two sessions per week. The results

showed positive outcomes in all areas: focus, calming behaviors, and social

interactions. The only negatives in the study were the small population sizes. At the

end of the study, they made note that further research is needed along with larger

sample sizes.

The article was well written and contained helpful information to my

research. The research could have been richer if there would have been more of an

explanation about the specifics of the Snoezelen room. Authors did not mention the

exact size of the room. A few of the tools inside the room were described, but not all

of them. The study was conducted in Norway. The article also made mention to the
fact that little base research has been conducted on sensory environments, which

proved the idea that sensory is a new hot topic and needs to be researched more.

My attitude towards the subject was not changed after this information. I

found it helpful to review the effects of a Snoezelen room/environment. Many

articles talk about the effects and benefits of sensory tools, but I loved this article

because it specifically talked about a room designed particularly for sensory objects.

The overall study showed positive influences on students, which supports my

attitude on the subject of sensory.

Mills, C., Chapparo, C., & Hinitt, J. (2016). The impact of an in-class sensory activity

schedule on task performance of children with autism and intellectual

disability: A pilot study. Journal of Occupational Therapy, 75(9), 530-539.

Retrieved March 20, 2018.

Three women completed a study on the impact of in-class sensory activity

schedule on task performance. There were four participants, all boys that had been

diagnosed with autism, ages ranging from 5-7 years old. These boys showed

behaviors that were sensory and movement seeking. The boys were evaluated by

occupation therapists, before given sensory the intervention. The intervention

consisted of an individualized sensory activities based on the boys specific sensory

needs. A few activity examples are: bouncing on a therapy ball, deep touch pressure,

body socks, and jumping on a mini trampoline. The boys would receive a 10-minute

sensory activity before being asked to complete tasks throughout the day. The

results showed significant improvements in task mastery for 3 out of the 4 students.

Overall results showed the sensory activity intervention to be effective.

This study proved to be valid, because of the use of occupational therapists

being involved in interpreting results and interpreting observations. Occupational

therapists are experts in the area of sensory along with autism interventions.

Occupational therapists in the school setting especially are seen as consults for

creating on task behaviors and interventions to create more on task behaviors. The

researchers who conducted the study outlined it well; along with listing possible

other studies in the future. They mentioned the need for replicating the study with a
wider population size to show a true representation of generalized results.

Researchers also went into great detail on the data tool used to collect data

throughout the study.

This article was helpful to my research. It gave a great example of how to set-

up an intervention study. It also gave great references throughout the study. I found

it helpful especially to my research, because of the relatable small population size

and limit resources available along with space for setting up the possible

intervention. All of the intervention took place within the classroom rather than in

another location, along with the sensory activities tools that are easier to locate and

find available. This study did not change my views towards the topic. It actually

supported my exact views and thoughts.


Parker, N., & O'Brien, P. (2011). Play therapy-reaching the child with

autism. International Journal of Special Education, 26(1), 80-87. Retrieved

January 29, 2018.

Parker and O’Brien studied the effect that play therapy has on children with

autism. Their study focused on using therapeutic sand to help students with autism

express their emotions rather than using words, which is difficult for students on

the autism spectrum. The study took place in a therapy office with a seven year-old

boy diagnosed with autism and referred to the therapy office after having many

aggressive outbursts in school and being unable to control his emotions. The child

was given a tray with therapeutic sand for 12 sessions lasting about 45 minutes.

Results showed by the end the child did not destroy the sand and simply build

structures and played with the toys peacefully in the sand, whereas during the first

few sessions the child destroyed the sand and toys used in the sand. This showed

that the study had positive results and that sand can be used as a calming strategy

for students, while also helping the child express his emotions through actions not

words.

Throughout the article Parker and O’Brien had systematic theories and

research behind the use of therapeutic sand to calm emotions when emotional

thoughts cannot be expressed properly. The research would have been richer if

there would have been a bigger sample size; the study only researched one child. It

was also beneficial to have the perspective of an outside therapist that analyzes

children on the autism spectrum. The authors are credible, but further research is
needed especially in the educational setting, which was stated at the conclusion of

the article.

I found this article useful, because of the use of therapeutic sand for calming

efforts. The child in the study was diagnosed with autism, and he was in elementary

school. I thought it was beneficial that the authors made note of his age and

underlying aggression issues the child was having in school. The therapeutic sand

also meets the needs of sensory and using kinesthetic movements appropriately.

This article was very helpful in giving me an intervention that worked on an autistic

child, addressing the kinesthetic movements needed for calming. This informs my

research by addressing one specific type of intervention plan using therapeutic sand

for calming an autistic child with aggression issues.

Pfeiffer, B. A., Koenig, K., Kinnealey, M., Sheppard, M., & Henderson, L. (2011).

Research Scholars Initiative—Effectiveness of sensory integration

interventions in children with autism spectrum disorders: A pilot study.

American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 65, 76-85. Retrieved on April 7,

2018.

Researchers completed a pilot study on the effectiveness of sensory

integration interventions for students with autism. There were 37 participants

involved in the study ranging from ages 6-12, all having been diagnosed with

autism. Participants either received a sensory integration intervention, or a fine

motor intervention. This was assigned randomly. The two interventions involved

tabletop activities for the students. The purpose was to allow the students inclusion

possibilities. The participants received 18 intervention sessions for 6 weeks lasting

45 minutes a session. The intervention activities were goal specific based on the

student’s individual needs and the parents goals for the students. Results showed to

be highly effective for the students. The sensory integration intervention showed a

significant positive affect and had better results than the fine motor intervention,

although both were shown effective, sensory integration was higher.

The authors of this article are all researchers in the fields of autism and

occupational therapy, which helps establish their credibility. The research article

was written very well, the authors lead up to the research study by first explaining

in detail why sensory interventions are needed, what exactly sensory interventions

are and the characteristics of autism that make sensory interventions so important
and beneficial for that type of learners. The assessment tools used to collect data

were credible and they used a 4-point Likert-scale along with surveys. The

population size of the study was bigger than most, which gave researchers a great

collection of data.

This article was helpful to my research. Researchers used data collection

tools that sound helpful and gave me resources to look up those tools and possibly

use them in my own research. The results of the study confirmed my attitude

towards the topic and the sensory interventions were proven to be more effective

than the fine motor interventions. This supports my research and gave me great

supportive resources to continue my research.

Schaaf, R. C., Benevides, T. W., Kelly, D., & Mailloux-Maggio, Z. (2012). Occupational

therapy and sensory integration for children with autism: A feasibility, safety,

acceptability and fidelity study. Autism, 16(3), 321-327. Retrieved April 4,

2018.

This research was written with the purpose was to evaluate the safety,

acceptability, and feasibility of sensory integration and sensory interventions for

children with autism. There were 10 participants, children ages 4-8 diagnosed with

autism in New Jersey. Researchers evaluated an intervention program that lasted

for six weeks and a total of three hours a week. The interventionist was two licensed

occupational therapists certified in the area of sensory integration. Students were

evaluated and then given a sensory tool and guided intervention based upon their

unique strengths and limitations to help them focus and stay calm during an

inclusion session. The student activities were based upon the child-centered

approach, sensory-rich, playful, and scaffolding approach. Results showed the

intervention was safe, long enough, and beneficial to all students. Results also

proved that for a sensory intervention to be effective it must be tailored to the

student’s individual unique needs.

The research article was outlined and organized very well. There was room

for questionability when it did not state the specific sensory tool that students used

during the intervention. Overall the intervention lacked a specific description

leaving room for questionability. The approach was explained and outlined well by

the tools that were used for data collection along with the description of the
observation process used. The intervention proved to be safe and beneficial for the

students. Authors also made mention to Winnie Dunn’s data collection tools, which

made the article credible since she is a leading researcher for sensory interventions.

I found this article somewhat helpful to my research. It would have been

more beneficial to myself if there had been a better description of the specific

intervention used. I found it helpful since the entire research process was outlined

well and the intervention was similar to what mine will be, because of the short time

and small population size.

Simpson, K., & Keen, D. (2011). Music interventions for children with autism:

Narrative review of the literature. Journal of Autism and Developmental

Disorders, 41, 1507-1514. Retrieved April 5, 2018.

For obvious reasons music impacts people. Researchers Kate and Deb

researched the impact that music interventions have on students with autism. Music

therapy has been proven to be very beneficial for students with autism. This study

reviewed multiple studies about 20 all conducting various interventions using music

for students with autism. Results showed that music interventions were successful

in the areas of communication, socialization, and behavior regulation. The studies

also kept reporting students seemed to be full of more “joy” and happiness. Music

has been shown to be very beneficial in multiple areas for students with autism.

Kate and Deb’s review of other interventions was interesting. I found areas of

questionability, because they did not perform their own study, they reviewed other

studies. The results were great, but they did not go into enough detail in the

interventions and studies they were reviewing. They stated toward the end of the

article that there is a lack of evidence in this area and there is a demand for more

investigating.

This article took a different perspective of using other sensory options. It is

commonly told that music helps us, but there is little research behind the facts about

this common idea. This research article helped contribute to my perspective and

music will be part of the intervention I plan to create, because music interventions

have shown many positives in the calming area. More research of course is needed,
but this is a start for the research in the music area of exploring and using different

senses to help calm students and children with autism. Overall I found this article

helpful. The article did not change my attitude towards sensory, but it

complimented my past research and gave me ideas for more research regarding the

hearing sense.

Stadele, N. & Malaney, L. (2001). The effects of a multisensory environment on

negative behavior and functional performance on individuals with

autism. Research Gate, 211–218. Retrieved March 10, 2018.

Stadele and Malaney completed a research study evaluating the effects of a

multi-sensory environment on negative behavior and functional performance on

students with autism. The study took place in Wisconsin with two individuals, a 17

year-old female and a 16 year-old male. Both had been diagnosed with autism and

living in a facility for children with disabilities. The study consisted of 6 total weeks.

Week 1 and 2 was just collecting data. Week 3 and 4 consisted of students receiving

the intervention. They were allowed to go into the multi-sensory room for 20

minutes at some point in the morning during their school day. Week 5 and 6

consisted of collecting follow-up baseline data again. The study followed an A-B-A

guideline for collecting data. The data was taken by various people which consisted

of them filling out a daily questionnaire. Results showed no clear effect, but did

show that subject 1 had fewer outbursts in the afternoon after having received the

intervention in the morning. The authors at the end came to the conclusion that

sensory room interventions should be individualized in order to be the most

effective in decreasing target behaviors.

The study’s results were unclear, which is still helpful research. The study

followed a great A-B-A pattern proving consistency, but there was a lot of

inconsistency in the person collecting the data. The data would have been more

credible and better interpreted if the same person would have been collecting data
throughout the study. There also was an inconsistency in the time of the

intervention. Students were only allowed to go into the room for a total of 20

minutes, but the time at which they received the intervention every day varied.

More consistency would have helped, but the authors were credible due to their

background in occupational therapy and autism research.

This article was extremely helpful to my research. The conclusions agreed

with my attitude towards the topic and the authors had a great explanation in the

importance of the research topic. More research is needed to come to a clear opinion

towards the topic of sensory interventions, but this article overall was very helpful

to my research. It also provided me with a great example of an A-B-A research study

pattern.

Stephenson, J. (2002). Characterization of multisensory environments: Why do

teachers use them? Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 15,

73-90. Retrieved March 17, 2018.

Sensory rooms are becoming more and more common in schools with a

diverse population of special needs students, especially students with severe

disabilities and even multiple disabilities. These sensory rooms were first

discovered in Holland and are called “Snoezelen.” Snoezelen comes from two Dutch

words, ‘sniffing’ and ‘dozing.’ It essentially means that these rooms are used for

sensory stimulation and relaxation. Fifteen schools in Australia created sensory

room environments for young children with either multiple disabilities or severe

disabilities, that consisted of a small room/suite that was painted either black or

white. Inside these rooms were various sensory stimulatory objects: foil, mirrors,

recorded music, textured materials to complex electrical equipment like a projector,

bubbles, tubes, fiber-optics, and light/sound effects. Results of the study showed

positive effects in various areas. Students were less agitated, more soothed,

increased motor development, increased motor skills coordination, an

understanding of cause and effect, and increased vocalization. Students gained many

positives after being in these sensory rooms for only 20 minutes a day.

This research study was completed in Australia, with a decent size

population considering the background of the sample students. The study was

outlined well and described thoroughly. The study was set up in the style of an

intervention, so the time frame was not the entire year, but it did not list how long
the intervention was. The article also mentioned the need for more further and

extensive research was needed to fully determine the effectiveness of sensory

rooms/environments.

The article supported my research topic and gave great ideas to create an

intervention in my classroom based upon the idea of sensory rooms. I found it

helpful that the researcher outlined exactly what a sensory room looked like along

with the contained objects inside of the sensory room. I also found it helpful to know

the background of a sensory room and when they were first created along with

some of the scientific research behind a sensory room. I will use this article and the

resources mentioned in the article to further my research on sensory rooms.