Search

This mini review aims at summarizing the current state-of-the-art of empirical unlearning and intentional forgetting (U/IF) research at the individual, team, and organizational level. It adds to an earlier review and incorporates 31 recent studies from 2019 to 2022. The review reveals that predictors based on the organization's adaptation context (e.g., competitive intensity), organization level (e.g., leadership exploration activities), individual task-related (e.g., features of the routines changed), and person-related level (e.g., cognitive control strategies) variables relate to process variables, such as the type of U/IF, the U/IF content (e.g., success beliefs or failure beliefs), and information processing variables (e.g., team information processing). The outcome variables are at the organizational level (e.g., cross-boundary innovation), team level performance level, the individual task performance level (e.g., errors), and person-related level (e.g., self-esteem). The analyzed studies at the team and organizational levels preferred crosssectional study designs or in-depth qualitative methods, which severely limits the possibility of making causal statements. In contrast, at the individual-level studies use longitudinal designs as well to make temporal aspects of U/IF visible. But these individual level results are limited in terms of their generalizability to other levels. Even though all studies make valuable contribution to the understanding of antecedents and outcomes of U/IF, the temporal and process-related aspects of how U/IF unfolds at the different levels and subsequent options for its deliberate facilitation remain empirically little elaborated. It is proposed that in addition to studying the antecedents and consequences of U/IF in cross sectional designs, the topic needs more longitudinal designs to capture the nature of the U/IF processes in organizations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This mini review aims at summarizing the current state-of-the-art of empirical unlearning and intentional forgetting (U/IF) research at the individual, team, and organizational level. It adds to an earlier review and incorporates 31 recent studies from 2019 to 2022. The review reveals that predictors based on the organization’s adaptation context (e.g., competitive intensity), organization level (e.g., leadership exploration activities), individual task-related (e.g., features of the routines changed), and person-related level (e.g., cognitive control strategies) variables relate to process variables, such as the type of U/IF, the U/IF content (e.g., success beliefs or failure beliefs), and information processing variables (e.g., team information processing). The outcome variables are at the organizational level (e.g., cross-boundary innovation), team level performance level, the individual task performance level (e.g., errors), and person-related level (e.g., self-esteem). The analyzed studies at the team and organizational levels preferred cross-sectional study designs or in-depth qualitative methods, which severely limits the possibility of making causal statements. In contrast, at the individual-level studies use longitudinal designs as well to make temporal aspects of U/IF visible. But these individual level results are limited in terms of their generalizability to other levels. Even though all studies make valuable contribution to the understanding of antecedents and outcomes of U/IF, the temporal and process-related aspects of how U/IF unfolds at the different levels and subsequent options for its deliberate facilitation remain empirically little elaborated. It is proposed that in addition to studying the antecedents and consequences of U/IF in cross sectional designs, the topic needs more longitudinal designs to capture the nature of the U/IF processes in organizations.

Background: Caregivers of children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) and developmental disabilities (DD) implement myriad strategies to support their children during daily activities and routines, which are laden with sensory stimuli. Children's sensory features are often characterized by three patterns of response (i.e., hyperresponsiveness, hyporesponsiveness, sensory seeking), and little is known about how caregivers' strategies differ among these patterns. Therefore, we used a mixed methods analysis to examine the complex interplay between children's sensory response patterns, child characteristics (diagnosis, chronological age, mental age), and caregiver strategies. Specifically, we examined how children's sensory response pattern scores were associated with caregiver strategies within sensory response pattern and at the item level. Lastly, we described the differential strategies implemented by caregivers of children with ASD and DD by sensory response pattern. Materials and Methods: Participants included children with ASD (n = 77) and DD (n = 40) aged 2-10 years. Caregivers completed the Sensory Experiences Questionnaire-2.1. A convergent parallel mixed methods approach was used to analyze data. Results: Children's sensory response pattern scores were significantly, positively associated with caregiver strategies within each sensory pattern (hyperresponsiveness, hyporesponsiveness, seeking); however, child mental age, and chronological age were not significantly related to the rate of caregiver strategies across patterns. While caregivers of children with ASD reported using more strategies, child diagnosis did not moderate the association between child sensory response pattern scores and the rate of caregiver strategies used. Item analysis demonstrated specific child behaviors in response to sensory stimuli that elicited high rates of strategies among caregivers. Qualitative analysis revealed distinct themes characterized caregiver strategies within each sensory pattern for children with ASD and DD. Conclusion: Our findings demonstrated specificity of caregiver strategies to children's sensory response patterns in the context of families' everyday lives, which were not contingent on child diagnosis, mental age, or chronological age, thereby highlighting universal qualities of caregiving for young children who experience varying levels of sensory challenges. Targeted intervention approaches may differentially incorporate types of strategies based on sensory response patterns to more optimally facilitate children's activity participation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BackgroundCaregivers of children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) and developmental disabilities (DD) implement myriad strategies to support their children during daily activities and routines, which are laden with sensory stimuli. Children’s sensory features are often characterized by three patterns of response (i.e., hyperresponsiveness, hyporesponsiveness, sensory seeking), and little is known about how caregivers’ strategies differ among these patterns. Therefore, we used a mixed methods analysis to examine the complex interplay between children’s sensory response patterns, child characteristics (diagnosis, chronological age, mental age), and caregiver strategies. Specifically, we examined how children’s sensory response pattern scores were associated with caregiver strategies within sensory response pattern and at the item level. Lastly, we described the differential strategies implemented by caregivers of children with ASD and DD by sensory response pattern.Materials and MethodsParticipants included children with ASD (n = 77) and DD (n = 40) aged 2–10 years. Caregivers completed the Sensory Experiences Questionnaire-2.1. A convergent parallel mixed methods approach was used to analyze data.ResultsChildren’s sensory response pattern scores were significantly, positively associated with caregiver strategies within each sensory pattern (hyperresponsiveness, hyporesponsiveness, seeking); however, child mental age, and chronological age were not significantly related to the rate of caregiver strategies across patterns. While caregivers of children with ASD reported using more strategies, child diagnosis did not moderate the association between child sensory response pattern scores and the rate of caregiver strategies used. Item analysis demonstrated specific child behaviors in response to sensory stimuli that elicited high rates of strategies among caregivers. Qualitative analysis revealed distinct themes characterized caregiver strategies within each sensory pattern for children with ASD and DD.ConclusionOur findings demonstrated specificity of caregiver strategies to children’s sensory response patterns in the context of families’ everyday lives, which were not contingent on child diagnosis, mental age, or chronological age, thereby highlighting universal qualities of caregiving for young children who experience varying levels of sensory challenges. Targeted intervention approaches may differentially incorporate types of strategies based on sensory response patterns to more optimally facilitate children’s activity participation.

Using mixed methods, this study examined the relationship of caregivers of children with disabilities’ psychological well-being and their orchestration of daily routines within their ecological niche. Thirty-nine U.S. caregivers completed in-depth interviews, Psychological Well-being Scales (PWB), and Family Time and Routines Index (FTRI). We used a multi-step analysis. Interview data was coded and vignettes created without knowledge of PWB and FTRI ratings. Next, the relationship of quantitative measures was analyzed. Four groups were created using FTRI-extent and PWB means: (1) low routine-low PWB, (2) low routine-high PWB, (3) high routine-low PWB, and (4) high routine-high PWB. We examined qualitative differences in key features between groups. Findings: Total PWB and FTRI scores were not significantly correlated, PWB Purpose in Life and FTRI-extent scores were moderately positively correlated, and PWB Environmental Mastery and FTRI-extent correlation approached significance. Qualitative findings describe caregivers’ structuring of routines, intensity of oversight, support in routines, management of dinner, paid work, and needs for respite. The four groups differed in paid work, household support, degree the child could self-occupy, Environmental Mastery, and opportunities to recuperate. Caregivers with higher levels of well-being and more regular routines did paid work, had supportive spouses, had children who more often could follow routines, had higher Environmental Mastery, could orchestrate a family meal, and had breaks from care in either work or leisure. All Native American caregivers and Mexican American caregivers with spouses were in the high routine-high PWB group. Insight into this complex negotiation between family members within daily routines may provide practitioners a better understanding of how to work within family circles to foster therapeutic alliances, identify focused intervention targets, and promote positive family-wide outcomes.

Using mixed methods, this study examined the relationship of caregivers of children with disabilities? psychological well-being (PWB) and their orchestration of daily routines within their ecological niche. Thirty-nine U.S. caregivers completed in-depth interviews, PWB Scales, and FamilyTime and Routines Index (FTRI).We used a multi-step analysis. Interview data was coded and vignettes created without knowledge of PWB and FTRI ratings. Next, the relationship of quantitative measures was analyzed. Four groups were created using FTRI-extent and PWB means: (1) low routine-low PWB, (2) low routine-high PWB, (3) high routine-low PWB, and (4) high routine-high PWB. We examined qualitative differences in key features between groups. Findings: Total PWB and FTRI scores were not significantly correlated, PWB Purpose in Life and FTRI-extent scores were moderately positively correlated, and PWB Environmental Mastery and FTRI-extent correlation approached significance. Qualitative findings describe caregivers? structuring of routines, intensity of oversight, support in routines, management of dinner, paid work, and needs for respite. The four groups differed in paid work, household support, degree the child could selfoccupy, Environmental Mastery, and opportunities to recuperate. Caregivers with higher levels of well-being and more regular routines did paid work, had supportive spouses, had children who more often could follow routines, had higher Environmental Mastery, could orchestrate a family meal, and had breaks from care in either work or leisure. All Native American caregivers and Mexican American caregivers with spouses were in the high routine-high PWB group. Insight into this complex negotiation between family members within daily routines may provide practitioners a better understanding of how to work within family circles to foster therapeutic alliances, identify focused intervention targets, and promote positive family wide outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]