636 APPENDICES The expectation is that when reciprocal interactions occur between Levi and Gerda, Levi’s behaviour becomes less self-determined. This will be first noticeable in relation to Gerda and then also in relation to his parents. The intervention was achieved by utilizing almost alle movement features: direction, speed, distance, muscle tension, and sound. Gerda started putting emphasis on all these movement features to attract Levi’s attention and to elicit following behaviour. The variable tested was measured using the Motion Energy Analysis (MEA) program developed by Ramseyer and Tschacher (2011). Roughly translated, this means ‘movement intensity’. The movement feature that is closest to MEA is speed. The MEA time series provided insight into the underlying dynamics of the dyad as a system. Based on CRQA, we have determined that after one year of treatment, there was an increase in average and maximum duration in Levi’s following behaviour in terms of movement intensity. This marked the beginning of reciprocal development. The expectation that Levi would become less autonomous and that family relationships would improve had been partially fulfilled after 1.5 years of treatment. Intensive and long-term treatment appeared to be necessary and was subsequently implemented. Zack and John This case revolved around the 16-year-old man Zack. The case report indicated that he had been diagnosed with a mild intellectual disability and autism. Since 2010, Zack had been living in a small residential home for young people with an intellectual disability. Zack was referred for treatment with the “Movement-as-anchor “ program due to increasing behavioural problems in the residential home. Zack exhibited verbally and physically aggressive, destructive, and sexually inappropriate behaviour. The intervention aimed at the perspective that Zack gained experience in having pleasant and enjoyable interactions with others, thereby improving his quality of life. The therapist was John, a 51-year-old man who had been familiar with Movement-asanchor for over eight years. At the beginning of the treatment, a movement analysis was conducted on Zack in relation to therapist John during coffee break. Instances of following behaviour and togetherness primarily occurred upon John’s initiative. Specifically, this meant that Zack showed little initiative in initiating contact with John, and when John looked at Zack, Zack would not look back. Substantial differences between Zack and John in almost all movement features were visible. The goal of this intervention was also the development of reciprocity. John started creating shared moments by following Zack’s initiatives, for example, John looked at what Zack was looking at. Then, efforts were made to develop Zack’s following behaviour. This was achieved by John using movement features such as direction and speed. The variables tested were gaze direction and ‘movement intensity,’ measured
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw