08. dunn, pp.

172-185 8/29/02 11:24 AM Page 172

Asperger Syndrome and

Sensory Processing:
A Conceptual Model and Guidance
for Intervention Planning

Winnie Dunn, Jessica Saiter, and Louann Rinner

The purpose of this article is to discuss sensory processing concepts and their applica- reon & Myles, 2001; Anderson & Em-
tion to the needs of children who have Asperger syndrome (AS). First we will outline mons, 1996; Ayres, 1972, 1979; Cook
the basic characteristics of the sensory systems, then discuss a model for sensory pro- & Dunn, 1998; Fisher, Murray, &
cessing, and, finally, present a summary of the data supporting the application of this Bundy, 1991). There is some preliminary
model in work with children who have AS. A framework is outlined for incorporating empirical evidence suggesting that there
sensory processing concepts into practice and research programs that address the
are significant differences in the sensory
needs of children with AS. Finally, we will present case studies demonstrating the
processing patterns of children who have
application of sensory processing principles.
AS (Dunn et al., 2002). Some authors
view the specific criteria listed under the
heading “Repetitive and Restricted

T
he Diagnostic and Statistical
Manual of Mental Disorders–
Fourth Edition–Text Revision
(DSM-IV-TR; American Psychiatric As-
sociation [APA], 2000) contains the
most widely used diagnostic criteria for
identifying Asperger syndrome (AS) as a
category of Pervasive Developmental
Disorders (PDD). This document con-
tains three behavioral criteria—qualita-
tive social impairment, repetitive and re-
strictive stereotyped patterns of behavior,
and significantly decreased social func-
tion—and three exclusion criteria—lan-
guage delays, cognitive delays, or other
significant diagnoses, including schizo-
phrenia or autism (APA, 2000).
It is interesting to note that these cri-
teria do not contain any explicit reference
to differences in sensory processing, even
though the original work on this disor-
der by Hans Asperger (1944) contained
descriptions about distinct sensory pro-
cessing behaviors (Dunn, Myles, & Orr,
2002). Asperger studied four children
and recorded the unique characteristics
they exhibited (Frith, 1991; Wing,
1991), including a range of hypo- and
hypersensitivities to taste, tactile, and au-
ditory stimuli. For example, male chil-
dren discussed in his case studies pre-
ferred very sour or strongly spiced foods.
Similarly, they strongly disliked tactile
input (e.g., textures of some fabrics, fin-
gernail cutting) and were also very sensi-
tive to noise in certain situations but
oblivious to noise in other environments.
Each of these sensory problems inter-
fered with their daily routines.
More recently, consideration has been
given to the possibility that sensory pro-
cessing is an underlying feature of AS
(Attwood, 1998; Fling, 2000; Myles &
Simpson, 1998; Myles & Southwick,
1999; Stagnitti, Raison, & Ryan, 1999;
Willey, 1999). Practitioners and scholars
have anecdotally reported about the re-
lationships between sensory processing
functions in daily life, including learning,
play, work, and socialization (e.g., Ad-
Stereotyped Patterns of Behavior, Activ-
ities, and Interests” (p. 84) to be reflec-
tive of difficulty with sensory processing,
including (a) a preoccupation with one
or more stereotyped and restricted pat-
terns of interest that is abnormal either in
intensity or focus; (b) inflexible adher-
ence to specific, nonfunctional routines
or rituals; (c) stereotyped and repetitive
motor mannerisms; and (d) persistent
preoccupation with parts of objects
(Frith, 1991; Gillberg, 1992; Huebner,
2001; Zero to Three, 1994).
The purpose of this article is to discuss
sensory processing concepts and their ap-
plication to the needs of children who
have AS. We will outline the basic char-
acteristics of the sensory systems, discuss
a model for sensory processing, and pre-
sent a summary of the data supporting
the application of this model in work
with children who have AS. Then we will
outline a framework for incorporating
sensory processing concepts into practice
and research programs that address the

FOCUS ON AUTISM AND OTHER DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES

VOLUME 17, NUMBER 3, FALL 2002
PAGES 172–185
08. dunn, pp. 172-185 8/29/02 11:24 AM
needs of children with AS. Finally, we will
present case studies demonstrating the
application of sensory processing princi-
ples.
Basic Characteristics of the
Sensory Systems
There are seven basic sensory systems
within the nervous system: sound, touch,
vision, taste, smell, movement, and body
position. Myles, Tapscott Cook, Miller,
Rinner, and Robbins (2000) provided a
summary of the characteristics of these
sensory systems and their function in
human beings (see Table 1). The visual
and auditory systems provide informa-
tion about the world, the touch and body
position systems provide information
about the person’s body, and the move-
ment system provides information about
the interaction of the body in the world.
The taste and smell systems provide a
mechanism for sustaining the organism
by accessing information for obtaining
food, and for protection.
The sensory systems provide the route
for the brain to receive information. The
function of the input mechanisms them-
selves produce sensory acuity (e.g.,
whether the person’s eyes receive light,
etc.). The brain is responsible for making
meaning out of this information and for
designing and implementing a response
(i.e., processing). For children who have
AS, the sensory input structures are usu-
ally intact; the difficulty with sensory
processing occurs as the child tries to use
that sensory input (i.e., process it) to re-
spond to task and environmental de-
mands.
A Model for Sensory
Processing
Dunn (1997) proposed a model for
sensory processing that characterizes pat-
terns of responding based on a per-
son’s neurological thresholds and self-
regulation strategies. Figure 1 summariz-
es these relationships and provides basic
information about the characteristics of
each pattern of sensory processing. The
neurological threshold continuum moves
Page 173
VOLUME 17, NUMBER 3, FALL 2002
from low to high thresholds, whereas the
behavioral response continuum moves
from passive to active self-regulation stra-
tegies. When these continua intersect,
four basic patterns of sensory processing
emerge, representing the anchor points of
the continua.
The neurological thresholds contin-
uum represents the amount of input the
nervous system requires before respond-
ing. When a person has high thresholds,
this means that it takes a lot of input for
the nervous system to take notice and
then generate a response. When a person
has low thresholds, this means that it
takes very little input for the nervous sys-
tem to take notice, and lots of responses
are generated.
The self-regulation continuum repre-
sents the range of strategies a person
might use in responding to task and en-
vironmental demands. A person who re-
sorts to passive strategies has a tendency
to let things happen; a person who uses
active strategies reveals a tendency to
generate responses to control input.
The intersection of these continua cre-
ates four basic patterns of sensory pro-
cessing: low registration, sensation seek-
ing, sensory sensitivity, and sensation
avoiding. Low registration represents the
combination of high neurological thres-
holds with a passive self-regulation strat-
egy. Sensation seeking represents the
combination of high thresholds with an
active self-regulation strategy. Sensory
sensitivity is the combination of low neu-
rological thresholds with a passive self-
regulation strategy, and sensation avoid-
ing represents the combination of low
neurological thresholds with an active
self-regulation strategy.
Low Registration
Children who have low registration pat-
terns seem uninterested, self-absorbed,
and sometimes dull in affect. They do
not notice what is going on around them
and miss cues that might guide their be-
haviors. We hypothesize that most events
in daily life do not contain a sufficient
amount of intensity to meet these chil-
dren’s thresholds; their passive strategies
lead to their being somewhat oblivious to
173
activities. Some families report that their
child does not respond to initial auditory
information. For example, parents may
be concerned about a hearing problem
because their child does not respond to
his or her name (Marks, Schrader, Ton-
gaker, & Levine, 2000).
Weimer, Schatz, Lincoln, Ballantyne,
and Trauner (2001) reported a deficit in
proprioception (sensory input from the
muscles and joints) for children with AS,
which may contribute to the characteris-
tic of “clumsiness” cited by multiple au-
thors (Attwood, 1998; Bonnet & Goa,
1996; Gillberg, 1989; McKelvey, Lam-
bert, Mottron, & Shevell, 1995; Tatum,
1988; Wing, 1981). From a sensory pro-
cessing point of view, these children may
need a high amount of proprioceptive
input to successfully participate in physi-
cal activities. This would be achieved by
adding weight to the child’s body or to
objects the child interacts with. For ex-
ample, we might have the child wear
a weighted vest, or wrist and ankle
weights, during specific activities. The
added weight provides additional body
sensory input so the child can be more
aware of body parts. Authors have also
reported increased attention and de-
creased fidgeting using weighted vests
for children with autism and attention-
deficit/hyperactive disorder (Fertel-
Daly, Bedell, & Hinojosa, 2001; Van-
denBerg, 2001; see Figure 2).
Sensation Seeking
Children who have sensation-seeking pat-
terns are very active, continuously en-
gaging, and excitable. They take pleasure
from sensory experiences and so gener-
ate additional sensory input for them-
selves. We hypothesize that they are en-
gaging in active strategies to increase
input as a means to meet high thresholds.
For children who have AS, sensation
seeking may manifest as the need to
move about the environment, for exam-
ple, pacing back and forth when others
remain seated.
Peculiarities that others might classify
as speech and language issues also have a
sensory-seeking quality. For example, the
child might overuse hand gestures or
08. dunn, pp. 172-185 8/29/02 11:24 AM Page 174

174

TABLE 1
Location and Functions of the Sensory Systems
System Location Function

Tactile Skin—density of cell distribution varies throughout Provides information about the environment and ob-
(touch) the body. Areas of greatest density include mouth, ject qualities (touch, pressure, texture, hard, soft,
hands, and genitals. sharp, dull, heat, cold, pain).

Vestibular Inner ear—stimulated by head movements and Provides information about where our body is in
(balance) input from other senses, especially visual. space, and whether or not we or our surroundings
are moving. Tells about speed and direction of
movement.

Proprioception Muscles and joints—activated by muscle contrac- Provides information about where a certain body
(body awareness) tions and movement. part is and how it is moving.

Visual Retina of the eye—stimulated by light. Provides information about objects and persons.
(sight) Helps us define boundaries as we move through
time and space.

Auditory Inner ear—stimulated by air/sound waves. Provides information about sounds in the environ-
(hearing) ment (loud, soft, high, low, near, far).

Gustatory Chemical receptors in the tongue—closely en- Provides information about different types of taste
(taste) twined with the olfactory (smell) system. (sweet, sour, bitter, salty, spicy).

Olfactory Chemical receptors in the nasal structure—closely Provides information about different types of smell
(smell) associated with the gustatory system. (musty, acrid, putrid, flowery, pungent).

Note. From Asperger Syndrome and Sensory Issues: Practical Solutions for Making Sense of the World, by B. S. Myles, K. T. Cook, N. E. Miller, L. Rinner, and
L. A. Robbins, (p. 5). Copyright 2000 by the Autism Asperger Publishing Company. Reprinted with permission.
08. dunn, pp. 172-185 8/29/02 11:24 AM Page 175

VOLUME 17, NUMBER 3, FALL 2002

175

Low Sensation Sensory Sensation

Registration Seeking Sensitivity Avoiding
Neurological
thresholdsa
(The amount of
stimuli we need High High Low Low
to notice or react)

Behavioral
response/
self-regulation Passive Active Passive Active
strategya
Functional High ability to focus High ability to High ability to High ablity to
characteristics on something generate ideas and notice what is going on design & implement
of this pattern responses in the environment structure
of sensory
processing Unaffected by Notices and enjoys Particular Enjoys routines
varying all the activity in about task completion
environments the environment parameters

Potentially Appears to be Always active, Distractible in Resistant to

interfering uninterested or continuously busy, complex change
characteristics withdrawn engaging settings
of this pattern
of sensory May have a dull Fidgety and May seem like Reliant on
processing affect or seem excitable a “complainer” rituals to participate
self-absorbed
May seem “overly tired”
or apathetic
aHypothesized relationships based on Dunn’s conceptual model of sensory processing.

FIGURE 1. Characteristics of specific sensory processing patterns when considering Dunn’s conceptual model of sensory
processing. Note. For original discussion of these concepts, see Dunn (1997).

Low Sensation Sensory Sensation

Registration Seeking Sensitivity Avoiding
Neurological
thresholdsa High High Low Low

Behavioral
response/
self-regulation Passive Active Passive Active
strategya
Common Does not notice facial Demonstrates Marked distress with Lack of spontaneous
characteristics expressions or gestures repetitive patterns change seeking to share
of individuals of others of behavior enjoyment
with Asperger
syndrome Limited capacities for Intense pursuit of Strong dislike for Limited participation in
self-monitoring interests and certain fabrics social play or games
activities

May be motorically Verbosity Aversion to daily life May create “rituals” or

“clumsy” activities with strong rigid social approaches
Symptoms of tactile sensory input
overactivity and Self-isolation
inattention Hypersensitive to
environmental noise
aHypothesized relationships based on Dunn’s conceptual model of sensory processing.

FIGURE 2. Common characteristics of individuals with Asperger syndrome when considering Dunn’s conceptual model of
sensory processing.
08. dunn, pp. 172-185 8/29/02 11:24 AM
FOCUS ON AUTISM AND OTHER DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES
176
nod his or her head when speaking, or
might stand closer to others than is nec-
essary during conversation. Children
with AS also make repeated noises and
words that create a certain feel and sound
as the word flows across the tongue and
mouth. Shore (2001) reported that these
actions are pleasurable for children with
AS. They may seek sensation by putting
unusual, nonedible objects in their
mouths, chewing whole sugar packets,
using their teeth to shave sand from
emery boards, or crunching up tin foil in
their mouths. These activities provide
scratchy and gritty texture sensations be-
yond those a typical diet might provide
(Willey, 1999).
Sensory Sensitivity
Children who have sensory-sensitivity
patterns are distractible, are hyperactive,
and can be complainers. They notice
many more sensory events than others do
and comment about them with regular-
ity. We hypothesize that they have low
thresholds that enable them to have a
heightened awareness of what is going
on around them. These children use pas-
sive strategies in that they allow things
to happen and comment rather than
removing themselves (as a sensation
avoider is likely to do). Children with AS
and their families frequently report
sound and touch sensitivities. These chil-
dren may, for example, report hearing
the sound of an approaching train or air-
plane some time before others notice it.
Some children with AS have reported
being distracted by butterflies or another
person’s teeth to the point that it in-
terferes with maintaining a conversation
(Attwood, 1998).
Sensation Avoiding
Children who have sensation-avoiding
patterns are rule bound, ritual driven, and
uncooperative. They engage in behaviors
to limit the sensory input they must deal
with. We hypothesize that they are en-
gaging in these active self-regulation
strategies because unfamiliar sensory in-
put is difficult to understand and organize
Page 176
or might even be “threatening” to their
nervous systems. Predictable patterns of
behavior provide a high rate of familiar
sensory input while simultaneously limit-
ing the possibility of unfamiliar input.
For children who have AS, avoiding
patterns interfere with their use of typi-
cal materials and lead to the design of
specific ways to achieve an outcome. Fre-
quently, these specific ways restrict the
child’s willingness to participate in typi-
cal daily routines. The potential of deal-
ing with threatening input often leads a
child to impose rules and restrictions
upon others, as well. For example, while
shampooing, a child who is a sensation
avoider might want to avoid the unex-
pected splash of water on his or her face.
The child’s parent may have learned to
use a dry washcloth to wipe shampoo
away from the child’s face, therefore be-
coming the only person who can help
with this routine. Another child may
refuse to participate in small cooperative-
group educational activities because
working with others on the floor poses
too many opportunities for accidental
bumping. For others, the feeling of cer-
tain fabrics is an aggravation that leads to
limitations of clothing choices. Emo-
tional reactions that seem extreme or in-
congruent to the situation may result if
escape from the sensation is not possible.
Combined Patterns of
Sensory Processing
It is important to remember that chil-
dren do not have a single sensory pro-
cessing pattern but, rather, have several
patterns in their repertoires (Dunn,
2001). A child might be a sensation
avoider for auditory stimuli and yet have
more moderate responses for other sen-
sory-system input. For intervention plan-
ning, knowledge about sensory systems
(e.g., visual, auditory, touch) and sensory
processing patterns are helpful.
Studies About Sensory
Processing
Several lines of investigation have been
aimed at understanding both the nature
of sensory processing and the role of sen-
sory processing in various human condi-
tions. The findings from these studies
provide support for the concepts about
sensory processing reflected in Dunn’s
model of sensory processing and indicate
that there are distinct differences in sen-
sory processing patterns among persons
with disabilities, including AS.
The Nature of Sensory
Processing
Dunn and colleagues have studied the
nature of sensory processing in infants,
toddlers (Dunn, 2002; Dunn & Daniels,
in press), children (Dunn, 1999; Dunn
& Brown, 1997; Dunn & Westman,
1997), adolescents, and adults (Brown,
Tolefson, Cromwell, Dunn, & Filion,
2001; Brown, Tolefson, Dunn, Crom-
well, & Filion, 2001). Using a set of
measures of sensory processing in daily
life (i.e., the Infant/ Toddler Sensory Pro-
file, Sensory Profile, Adolescent/Adult
Sensory Profile), these researchers con-
ducted a series of principal component
factor analyses and found that items clus-
tered by the level of responsivity required
by the items rather than by the sensory
system tapped by the item. For example,
speaking loudly to get the child’s atten-
tion and finding ways to make noise with
toys are both auditory items, but the first
one reflects low registration and the sec-
ond one reflects sensation seeking. These
items loaded on different factors from
each other, and in the same factor with
other items that were similar in their sen-
sory processing patterns (in these cases,
low registration and sensation seeking).
Researchers have also reported prelim-
inary evidence that skin conductance pat-
terns (i.e., amplitude and habituation)
are unique for persons with a predomi-
nance of each of the sensory processing
patterns from Dunn’s (1997) model
(Brown et al., 2001; McIntosh, Miller,
Shyu, & Hagerman, 1999; Miller et al.,
1999). Dunn (2001) hypothesized that
the Sensory Profile measures ask ques-
tions in a way that enables persons to re-
port on what is happening inside their
own (or their child’s) body. These psy-
08. dunn, pp. 172-185 8/29/02 11:24 AM
chophysiological data provide interdisci-
plinary support for Dunn’s model.
Role of Sensory Processing in
Various Human Conditions
Dunn (2001) provided a summary of the
evidence indicating that difficulty with
sensory processing is a feature of various
disabilities, including genetic and devel-
opmental disorders, brain disorders,
schizophrenia, and chronic fatigue. For
example, Baranek (1999) studied chil-
dren with developmental disabilities and
autism and reported that these children
processed visual, auditory, touch, and
body position input differently from each
other and from peers without disabilities.
McIntosh et al. (1999) reported that chil-
dren with Fragile X syndrome respond to
sensory stimuli with more intensity, at
higher rates, and for longer times than
other children.
In studies using the Sensory Profile, re-
searchers have reported on differences in
sensory processing patterns with children
who have attention-deficit/hyperactivity
disorder (ADHD), autism, Asperger syn-
drome, Fragile X syndrome, and sensory
modulation disorder (Dunn & Bennett,
2002; Ermer & Dunn, 1998; Kientz &
Dunn, 1997; McIntosh et al., 1999; Wat-
ling, Deitz, & White, 2001). In addition,
Ermer and Dunn reported that disability
groups are significantly different from
each other. They conducted a discrimi-
nant analysis and classified the children
with autism, children with ADHD, and
children without disabilities correctly
(89% accuracy) based on Sensory Profile
scores alone. For the children with
ADHD, low-threshold items were the
most discriminating, whereas for the chil-
dren with autism, oral sensory processing
was the most discriminating.
In summary, there seems to be some
promise in Dunn’s model for providing a
structure for understanding sensory pro-
cessing patterns in all persons. Data from
several studies support the concepts of
this model in samples of persons without
disabilities across the life span. Addition-
ally, in studies with children who have var-
ious conditions, there are indications that
Page 177
VOLUME 17, NUMBER 3, FALL 2002
sensory processing may be an underlying
factor in the manifestation of the condi-
tions. Therefore, knowledge about sen-
sory processing may be useful in guiding
research and practice.
Incorporating Sensory
Processing Concepts
Into Practice
Each family has its own dynamics, but re-
searchers have noted some trends related
to children with AS. Families and the
family member with this diagnosis may
have used additional effort to pursue a di-
agnosis (Cohen & Volkmar, 1997).
Therefore, families may be familiar with
sensory processing through a variety of
avenues. Some family members report
noticing “different” responses to daily life
(Klin, Volkmar, & Sparrow, 2001) prior
to a diagnosis. Other children may have
received a previous diagnosis (e.g., au-
tism, obsessive–compulsive disorder,
ADHD, Tourette syndrome, schizophre-
nia; Attwood, 1998; Wing, 1991) that
also has associated sensory processing
concerns.
A diagnosis of AS typically occurs in el-
ementary school or later (Cohen & Volk-
mar, 1997; Gillberg & Coleman, 1992;
Volkmar, 1996). Research in sensory pro-
cessing has indicated that there are some
developmental trends in the evolution of
a child’s responses to sensory events, but
by school age, these trends have stabilized
(Dunn, 2001). Therefore, practitioners
may anticipate that sensory processing
patterns, once identified, can continue to
be helpful guideposts for intervention
and daily life planning for school person-
nel and families.
Also, researchers have noted the ge-
netic tendencies (Cohen & Volkmar,
1997; Gillberg, 1991; Gillberg & Cole-
man, 1992; Volkmar, 1996; Wing, 1991)
of AS. A child’s sibling, father, or uncle
may have similar traits. Therefore, family
members may have sensory processing
patterns that are similar, contributing an-
other dimension to the way that sensory
experiences are interpreted in families.
The potential increase in the complexity
of family dynamics has an impact on the
177
design and implementation of interven-
tions for these families.
This information about sensory pro-
cessing and the unique features of AS
offer practitioners a starting point for de-
signing and implementing interventions
that employ a sensory processing per-
spective. Additionally, with occupational
therapy’s emphasis on functional perfor-
mance in daily routines, we have a
framework for applying sensory process-
ing knowledge within the child’s life.
Therefore, the examples we provide il-
lustrate home, school, and community
applications.
A Sensory Processing
Perspective on the
Characteristics of Daily
Life Settings
During a typical day, a child gets ready in
the morning, participates in learning op-
portunities throughout the school day,
and accompanies family into the com-
munity for errands or leisure activities
after school. Each setting, and each ac-
tivity within those settings, contains
unique characteristics that can support
children and/or create challenges for
their performance. Although it is more
common to consider cognitive, social,
and motor opportunities, these settings
and activities also contain inherent (or, in
the case of intervention planning, con-
structed) sensory features. For this sec-
tion we will emphasize the sensory char-
acteristics of particular settings and
activities, acknowledging that cognitive,
social, and motor characteristics intersect
with those we are discussing here.
Home
The home offers familiar sensory infor-
mation. Family members’ voices are rec-
ognizable, as are sounds related to meal
preparation, laundry tasks, and other
household routines. The visual system of
the child’s room has an anticipated set-
up. The furniture feels the same from day
to day. Household activities and chores
have established patterns that generate
08. dunn, pp. 172-185 8/29/02 11:24 AM
FOCUS ON AUTISM AND OTHER DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES
178
vestibular and proprioceptive sensations
as family members move about to com-
plete them. The family typically struc-
tures routines around the child’s prefer-
ences (Gillberg, 1991; Wing, 1991); for
example, the family establishes a pattern
of agreed-upon foods at mealtime. Fam-
ily members engage in similar routines in
their home, including preparing and eat-
ing meals, getting ready for the day, and
interacting with each other. Typically, the
activities have a pattern that is acceptable
to most members. When families have a
member with AS, establishing these pat-
terns can be challenging. Conversely,
once a pattern is established, children
with AS can be very resistant to changes.
Sensory processing knowledge can help
make this process more successful.
School
School environments include sensory in-
formation that is familiar, but different in
intensity or duration. Students come
across additional sensory experiences
that are not typically within the home.
“One size fits all” desks and chairs made
for durability and efficient management
of school materials are difficult to toler-
ate for the child who needs movement to
stay focused. Colorful materials on bul-
letin boards and art projects hanging
from ceilings, meant to provide informa-
tion or visually motivate students, dis-
tract some students from their learning
tasks. Children with sound and smell sen-
sitivities may find it difficult to manage
encounters with school cafeterias serving
hundreds of lunches daily.
The environment of the middle
school–age child or high school student
includes multiple passing periods and
classrooms, myriad hallways, lockers that
continuously open and close, and a num-
ber of teachers with individual teaching
styles and expectations. For the child
overresponsive to touch sensations, un-
expected bumping by other students
within cooperative learning activities, in
lines, or during passing periods creates
anxiety and irritation that can lead to a
meltdown. The effective modulation of
sensations that is required by increased
sensory demands is difficult for the indi-
Page 178
vidual with AS in school, where sensation
is not as familiar or readily changeable.
Community
Transportation, shopping, eating out,
and attending community events pose an
even greater variety of inherent sensa-
tions, many unpredictable and beyond
the control of the participating public.
Children often need to accompany par-
ents as they tend to the necessities of
daily life. Shopping for groceries can be
an overwhelming sensory experience for
the child sensitive to smells, overhead
lighting, and unexpected intercom mes-
sages. The everyday activities that many
families take for granted become strug-
gles requiring management planning for
the individual with AS.
Summary
Creating successful supports that enable
individuals to participate more fully re-
quires consideration of the sensory pro-
cessing needs of the individual and the
inherent sensory characteristics of the
task and context. Persons with autism
spectrum disorders, including those with
AS, are often unable to report their own
sensory preferences and needs (Baranek,
1997), making it difficult for family,
teachers, and other individuals to under-
stand the basis for challenging behaviors.
Gaining an understanding about the child
and his or her environment through
skilled observation and ecological assess-
ment (including checklists, histories, and
questionnaires) is the first step to creat-
ing meaningful changes. The authors
propose to link Dunn’s model for un-
derstanding sensory processing patterns
with several instructional strategies found
to be effective for persons with AS.
Applying Sensory Processing
Knowledge Within Other
Learning Paradigms
Many cognitive and behavioral para-
digms can be applied when providing in-
struction and other interventions with
children who have AS. For this discus-
sion, we have selected five strategies fre-
quently included in supports designed
for individuals with AS. We will illustrate
adjustments that can be incorporated
within these five learning strategies to re-
spect individual sensory processing pat-
terns. The authors acknowledge that the
strategies addressed have inherent cogni-
tive features or may be behaviorally in-
fluential; additionally, for purposes of this
discussion we will point out both the in-
herent sensory processing characteristics
of the strategies and sensory processing
adaptations that can be made within these
strategies to refine the intervention for
individual children with particular sen-
sory processing patterns. We will empha-
size the most prominent characteristics of
each strategy, acknowledging that all ac-
tivities involve a number of sensory sys-
tem inputs. The five strategies are as fol-
lows: priming, working independently,
visual supports, home base, and social
stories; we provide an abbreviated defi-
nition for each of the strategies here. Ta-
ble 2 summarizes the definitions and in-
herent sensory processing characteristics
of each strategy.
Priming
This preview activity presents materials
or task processes in advance of actual in-
struction or expectation for participation
and interaction. Typically, priming in-
cludes elements with which the child is
likely to have trouble, and presentation is
in a nondemand manner to facilitate later
interactions. The purpose is to familiar-
ize the individual through exposure, de-
crease anxiety, and allow exploration.
Priming does not include teaching or at-
tempts to correct but incorporates high
levels of reinforcement for any attempts
to explore (Wilde, Koegel, & Koegel,
1992).
Working Independently
This strategy involves using personal and
environmental resources to complete a
task without reliance on or assistance
from another individual to initiate, per-
sist throughout, or terminate an activity.
08. dunn, pp. 172-185 8/29/02 11:24 AM Page 179

VOLUME 17, NUMBER 3, FALL 2002

179

TABLE 2
Examples of Interventions Using Learning Strategies Adjusted for Various Sensory Processing Patterns
Sensory processing pattern
Intervention/
Learning strategy Low registration Sensation seeking Sensory sensitivity Sensation avoiding

Overall approach Embed sensation to meet Embed sensation to meet Offer discriminating sen- Offer discriminating sen-
to intervention high thresholds so activity high thresholds so child sory information to honor sory information
gains child’s attention does not seek out distract- low thresholds so child is
ing sensations available to learn

Learning strategy
Priming Prepare for upcoming task
by meeting child’s high
threshold with media-
related activity
Engage in pleasurable task Provide discriminating Offer expected or familiar
with sensations that meet sensation prior to task sensations when introduc-
thresholds of next activity ing a new task

Working Embed sensations that Offer access to preferred Offer consistent discrimi- Request/instruct during
independently meet high thresholds w/in sensations in a manner that nating input during work tasks with sensation below
work activity assists performance tasks child’s thresholds

Visual supports Place supports in position Add sensation to maintain Place visual so it is acces- Use visuals with sensa-
that includes access to attention sible with low sensory de- tions familiar to the user
sensation mands

Home base Arrange home base to Include sensations in home Offer calming sensations Set up safe room with
offer items that meet base that meet child’s high w/in home base environ- preferred sensations
child’s need for calming thresholds ment
sensation

Social stories Develop stories with back- Give additional sensations Discuss social story while Review the social story in
ground sensations while using social story receiving discriminating a setting with familiar
sensations sensations

Strategies may be highly variable for the
same individual across different daily ac-
tivities. Initial instruction of the strategy,
with opportunities to practice and adjust,
is necessary before independent imple-
mentation is expected.
Visual Supports
A variety of supports presented in a visual
manner help organize physical and tem-
poral space so individuals can (a) antici-
pate and predict upcoming activities and
events, (b) experience easier transitions,
and (c) understand expectations. Audi-
tory cues and instructions are transient
and not available for reviewing. Concrete
representations not only limit ambiguity
for the individual with AS but also help
others convey directions and preparation
in a consistent manner.
Home Base
Access to a location apart from the in-
dividual’s routine environment allows
him or her to plan, regroup, or recover.
Home base is viewed as a positive at-
mosphere, not one to be associated with
punishment or escape from tasks. It may
be necessary to identify a number of
home base locations across contexts. Ac-
cess may be built into routines, such as at
the beginning of each day, or “on de-
mand” according to the needs of the in-
dividual child.
Social Stories
Social stories are short stories written
from the child’s perspective that describe
social situations and include relevant so-
cial cues. The purposes of social stories
vary, including addressing a variety of
behaviors (fears, obsessions, etc.); pro-
viding a model for desirable actions;
teaching routines; and correcting social
responses in a nonthreatening manner.
Gray (1995) provided comprehensive
guidelines for the creation and imple-
mentation of social story strategies.
Application of Sensory
Processing Knowledge:
Case Examples
The following examples illustrate a sen-
sory processing approach to interven-
tion. Children with AS seem to have sen-
sory processing patterns that are distinct
from other children’s and that can inter-
fere with their children’s interactions.
Knowledge about a child’s specific sen-
sory processing patterns can be useful in
crafting home, school, and community
08. dunn, pp. 172-185 8/29/02 11:24 AM Page 180

FOCUS ON AUTISM AND OTHER DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES

180

activities and environments that support
the child’s success. We provide general
sensory processing concepts, and exam-
ples of how to apply these concepts to
children’s performance. The strategies
listed are not formulas; rather, they are
examples founded in theory to support
the intervention planning process. Sen-
sory processing interventions focus not
only on the person but also on matching
the context and task to the person’s
strengths and challenges during daily
routines.
Case Study 1: Mark
Mark is an elementary school student
who needs to get ready for school in a
more efficient manner (illustrating low-
registration issues; see Table 3). He and
his younger brother attend the same ele-
mentary school. His parents report that
Mark has a difficult time getting ready
for school in the morning: He cannot
seem to wake up, and repeatedly lies back
down on the bed. His father says he
“runs out of gas”; he may get one sock
on and stop, for example. Another fam-
ily member has to continuously check on
him to keep things moving along.
Currently, he misses the bus about
2 to 3 times a month. He hates missing
the bus and typically takes 30 minutes to
an hour to calm down enough to leave
for school on these days. In addition,
these delays affect his parents’ schedules
because one of them has to calm him and
drive him to school, resulting in late ar-
rival to work.
The parents expressed these concerns
at the team meeting to plan Mark’s edu-
cational program. The teacher agreed
with the parents that getting ready was
important for Mark’s school day; when
Mark comes in late, the teacher sees a
much less effective school performance.
Team members also noticed these “slow
to start” patterns at school: Mark lays his
head down on his desk, leans on furni-
ture and other people, and is slow to re-
spond to questions. Mark’s Sensory Pro-
file (Dunn, 1999) results also verified
that he has low registration (i.e., misses
information, is slow to respond to stim-
uli in the environment). The team de-
cided that the occupational therapist
(OT) and the parents would have a
follow-up meeting to brainstorm strate-
gies and initiate interventions at home,
while the school team would identify
ways to enhance Mark’s classroom rou-
tines.
First, the OT explained low registra-
tion and Mark’s need for more intensity
of input so that he could notice and re-
spond to cues. Then they brainstormed
ways to increase Mark’s sensory input
during the morning routine at home.
They discussed turning up the volume
on Mark’s radio and changing it to a sta-
tion with upbeat music, to offer ade-
quate auditory input for meeting Mark’s

TABLE 3
Examples of Interventions That Combine Learning Strategies (Rows) with Low Registration Patterns (Columns):
Case Study 1–Mark
Sensory processing Sensation Sensory Sensation
pattern Low registration seeking sensitivity avoiding

Overall approach to intervention Embed sensation into activities to meet high thresholds
for each sensory processing pattern so the activity gains the person’s attention

Learning strategy
Priming H: Auditory—Provide loud, upbeat music while Mark is
getting ready
NOT APPLICABLE FOR MARK

NOT APPLICABLE FOR MARK

NOT APPLICABLE FOR MARK

S: Proprioceptive—Have Mark hand out books to class and

move items for teacher to provide additional input to
his body
C: Vestbular—Ask Mark to bend down to get supplies
from lower shelves in grocery store with head inverted
to increase input to movement receptors

Home base H: Proprioceptive—Have Mark move furniture in his room

to create a cozy home base
S: Vestibular—Offer rocking chair in back of the classroom
C: Tactile—Give Mark items for “fiddling” (e.g., stress ball,
mini-video games on a keyring)

Social stories H: Olfactory—Light a scented candle when reviewing the

story
S: Tactile—Use textured paper or cloth when writing
C: Visual—Offer the story in pictures in Mark’s wallet

Note. Mark is an elementary student who needs to get ready for school in a more effective manner (illustrating issues with low registration). We acknowledge
that the learning strategies have inherent cognitive features; we are pointing out the sensory processing characteristics only for the purposes of this discussion.
H = ideas for use in the home; S = ideas for use in the school; C = ideas for use in the community.
08. dunn, pp. 172-185 8/29/02 11:24 AM
high thresholds. They also decided to
open the blinds in Mark’s bedroom, to
introduce natural light for help with
waking up. After addressing the issue of
getting out of bed, they turned their at-
tention to the structure of the bath-
room. Mark’s father installed color-
coded dividers into Mark’s toiletries
drawer to make a section for each set of
supplies. This setup allowed for all of
Mark’s supplies to be more noticeable,
which met his high-threshold need for
visual information.
In addition, the OT and Mark’s par-
ents reevaluated Mark’s home base—
where he goes to calm himself when
upset. Typically, he goes into his room,
lies on his bed, and plays the radio loudly.
They decided to add some additional
sensory input that would simultaneously
calm Mark and provide him with more
intense information about his body to
meet his thresholds. To accomplish this
addition to home base, the family en-
couraged Mark to push his bed against
the wall to create a nook. They added
heavy pillows and beanbags for him to
arrange while listening to his music (i.e.,
he could sit on some of them, and pile
others on top of him). They also moved
his radio to a higher place, so he would
have to stretch his body to adjust the vol-
ume and other dials. While looking for a
heavy container to hold his CDs, Mark
found an old toolbox in the garage. He
loaded the CDs into this metal box, and
this provided additional input to his mus-
cles and joints as he manipulated the box
to make his selections. His family col-
lected supplies with similar characteristics
to take with them when the family went
out (a stress ball, mini–video games on
a key ring, travel games, etc.). These
changes were helpful in getting Mark out
the door in the morning. His mother also
moved one of her scented candles into
the bathroom to provide some olfactory
input while Mark was washing his face,
brushing his teeth, and so forth, and this
seemed to help him also. The school
team created routines for Mark to get
him up and moving around the class-
room more often. For example, they had
him pass out worksheets, collect materi-
als from other students, move books for
Page 181
VOLUME 17, NUMBER 3, FALL 2002
reading groups, and wipe off the board
for the teacher throughout the day. This
concept also helped when the family ran
errands: While shopping, they might
have Mark push the cart, send him to re-
trieve items at the end of the aisle, or re-
quest that he locate intriguing items with
unique or intense sensory features (fra-
grant foods or household items, clothing
with specific textures, etc.). The teacher
gave Mark some “smelly” markers to
write with, and this seemed to help him
during seatwork time. As the family and
other team members understood Mark’s
needs, they contributed additional ideas
to keep his thresholds activated through-
out the day.
Case Study 2: Ben
Ben is a middle school student who
needs to complete his homework and his
chores (illustrating sensation-seeking is-
sues; see Table 4). This year his school-
work demands have increased. Although
Ben is cognitively capable of doing the
work, he is struggling to get his home-
work finished. His teachers are frustrated
about this, too, as they are interested in
finding ways to get Ben to practice his
new skills (the primary function of his
homework right now). His family reports
that he gets distracted both from school-
work and from his assigned chores at
home. Ben engages in other activities
(playing with the dog, surfing the Inter-
net, rollerblading) instead of working on
his homework and completing his part of
the chores. His exuberance used to be
cute to his sisters, but they are becoming
increasingly irritated as they see that he is
capable and still does not pull his weight.
His family is glad that he is energetic, and
they want to work with school personnel
to channel that energy into productive
work as well as recreation options.
Because Ben would engage in other
activities instead of completing his home-
work, it was suggested that his family
work to reduce those distractions. They
set up a designated study space and re-
moved all extraneous materials and activ-
ities. Ben’s mother became frustrated be-
cause this actually made things worse;
181
Ben kept coming into the kitchen to see
what she was doing, roaming around the
house to ask siblings questions, singing,
and tapping on the walls. He would also
find alternate uses for his homework sup-
plies instead of completing the work.
When his mother checked, his work was
no further along.
The OT and Ben completed the
Adolescent/Adult Sensory Profile (Brown
& Dunn, 2002), and confirmed that Ben
seeks more sensations than do other chil-
dren. The OT met with Ben, his teach-
ers, and his parents to discuss the situa-
tion with them. Although others are
distracted by additional sensations, chil-
dren like Ben require extra stimulation to
be productive. When the family and
teachers removed things, they reduced
the information available to Ben, so he
increased his “recruitment” behaviors to
provide himself with the stimulation he
needed. The complication was that when
Ben did that, he stopped the focus activ-
ities to get the sensory input he needed.
The challenge for the team was to find
ways for Ben to get the extra sensory
input during the focus activities (home-
work and chores), so that he continued
to meet his needs while being produc-
tive.
Everyone decided that homework
should be tackled first. For the home-
work area, the OT suggested introducing
snacks that provided strong sensory
input (e.g., apples or carrots for their
crunchiness, strong mints, hard candy or
popping gum for their intense flavor and
texture in the mouth, a bowl of nuts for
the texture to the hands). Ben could ob-
tain additional sensory input with these
snacks and continue to work on his
homework. With their new understand-
ing about Ben’s needs, they offered to
get headsets so Ben could listen to music.
The OT suggested that they experiment
with which kinds of music supported
homework completion, limiting Ben’s
choices to that music that kept him work-
ing. They also moved a glider chair into
the space, so Ben could move back and
forth while studying.
Currently Ben uses a calendar to
record his assignments. The therapist
suggested modifying this visual schedule
08. dunn, pp. 172-185 8/29/02 11:24 AM Page 182

FOCUS ON AUTISM AND OTHER DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES

182

TABLE 4
Examples of Interventions That Combine Learning Strategies (Rows) with Sensation-Seeking Patterns (Columns):
Case Study 2–Ben
Sensory processing Low Sensation Sensory Sensation
pattern registration seeking sensitivity avoiding

Overall approach to intervention Embed sensation to meet high thresholds so the person
for each sensory processing pattern does not seek out distracting sensations

Learning strategy
Working independently H: Gustatory—Offer Ben crunchy snacks, gum, etc., to
provide additional imput
S: Visual—Provide worksheets on colored paper, write with

NOT APPLICABLE FOR BEN

NOT APPLICABLE FOR BEN

NOT APPLICABLE FOR BEN
colored or fragrant pens, change fonts on computer
C: Proprioceptive—Have Ben push the grocery cart, carry
bags between stores, get heavy items from the shelves

Visual supports H: Visual—Embed cues with visual interest (e.g., moving

parts, colorful words, complex pictures)
S: Auditory—Change songs, volume control, background
sounds on computer programs
C: Vestibular—Invite Ben to walk while reviewing his
schedule

Social stories H: Auditory—Tape-record story in character voices, add

sound effects within story, set script to song
S: Proprioceptive—Dramatize the scenario with jumping,
skipping, holding heavy objects during scenes
C: Visual—Videotape story or make a pop-up book

Note. Ben is a middle school student who needs to complete his homework and his chores (illustrating issues with sensation seeking). We acknowledge that the
learning strategies have inherent cognitive features; we are pointing out the sensory processing characteristics only for the purposes of this discussion.
H = ideas for use in the home; S = ideas for use in the school; C = ideas for use in the community.

to another media that would meet Ben’s
need for information to meet his high
thresholds. The teachers offered to e-
mail Ben his assignments so that he had
an opportunity to click through all the
computer menus to get them each day.
They also agreed to receive his work via
e-mail attachments, giving Ben more vi-
sual cues to employ to send his work
(e.g., using the word processing and the
e-mail programs together requires tog-
gling back and forth, creating a more
varied and interesting visual environ-
ment than paper and pencil). The OT
suggested that Ben select a different au-
ditory cue for each class so he would
know which class an e-mail pertained to;
Ben asked if he could add a signature
sound for himself to let the teachers
know it was him.
The family decided to apply these ideas
to chores at home. With Ben’s help they
designed a calendar for chores. Ben took
it upon himself to find intricate, active
singing icons for his chores, which helped
him in following the visual schedule.
Ben’s sisters suggested that the family use
the concept of increasing sensations at
restaurants when the entire family went
out to eat. They sought out restaurants
that offered a visually busy environment,
buffets where he could walk to get his
food, and tables with paper and crayons
to supply him with proprioceptive input
while he colored.
Occasionally, Ben would refuse to do
his homework in favor of a preferred ac-
tivity. The family had a social story to ad-
dress this issue, yet had difficulty main-
taining Ben’s attention while reviewing
it. Thinking about Ben’s needs for addi-
tional input, the family recorded the
story on videotape using animated
voices. They added sounds effect, such as
his dog barking, to affirm a point, or a fa-
vorite song in the background to em-
phasize responses. Because it increased
the visual and auditory input, the story
matched Ben’s high thresholds and he
was more successful at using his social
story to guide him. The family applied
these concepts for his other social story
themes, such as how to act when at the
grocery store, how to behave at restau-
rants, and so forth.
Once the school personnel and family
began to understand the sensory pro-
cessing aspects of Ben’s behaviors, every-
one was able to generate ideas and talk
with Ben about strategies. Ben also be-
came more aware of his own needs and
came up with ideas on his own.
Case Study 3: Miranda
Miranda is a junior in high school who
has difficulty making friends (illustrating
issues with sensation avoiding and sen-
sory sensitivity; see Table 5). Miranda
participates in general education classes as
well as academic programming for gifted
08. dunn, pp. 172-185 8/29/02 11:24 AM Page 183

VOLUME 17, NUMBER 3, FALL 2002

183

TABLE 5
Examples of Interventions That Combine Learning Strategies (Rows) with Low Threshold Patterns (Columns):
Case Study 3–Miranda
Sensory processing Low Sensation Sensory Sensation
pattern registration seeking sensitivity avoiding

Overall approach Offer discriminating sensory Offer discriminating sensory

to intervention information to honor low information to honor low
for each sensory thresholds so person is available for thresholds so person may engage in
processing pattern learning useful routines/habits

Learning strategy

NOT APPLICABLE FOR MIRANDA

NOT APPLICABLE FOR MIRANDA

Priming S: Tactile—Braid hair to increase firm

pressure and decrease light touch
prior to day
C: Olfactory—Offer familiar scents in
self-care products to screen out
smells before entering restaurant
C: Auditory—Arrrange seating at a
table to be next to “laid-back”
peers

Working independently S: Tactile—Wear clothing that covers S: Tactile—Position self in low-

well and is fitted traffic areas to prevent bumping

C: Visual—Educate others to use vi-

sual cues to gain her attention

Home base H: Visual—Set up a small area with

preferred poster and lava lamp
S: Vestibular—Provide a supportive
chair to minimize movement
C: Auditory—Use trips to the bath-
room to lower auditory input from
restaurant

Note. Miranda is a girl in high school who has difficulty making friends (illustrating issues with sensory sensivity and sensation avoiding). We acknowledge that
the learning strategies have inherent cognitive features; we are pointing out the sensory processing characteristics only for the purposes of this discussion.
H = ideas for use in the home; S = ideas for use in the school; C = ideas for use in the community.

learners. This setup includes a smaller class-
room, moderate academic flexibility with
topics of interest for part of her day, and
an individualized work area. During her
general education classes, this room dou-
bles as a home base for when she is feel-
ing overwhelmed.
Although Miranda performed above
her peers academically, she struggled with
social issues. For example, teachers and
family members commented on her al-
ways “messing with her hair,” to the point
where she was pulling out large clumps.
During the interview with the OT, Mi-
randa revealed that she was bothered by
the light touch of her hair brushing
against the side of her face. Utiliz-
ing interviews, observation, and the Ado-
lescent/Adult Sensory Profile (Brown &
Dunn, 2002), the team refined their in-
terpretation of this behavior. They origi-
nally assumed that Miranda sought out
sensation, when actually she was sensitive
to the light touch of her hair, and pulling
it firmly helped her cope with the dis-
tracting sensation.
Miranda had worn her hair in a shorter
style in the past but preferred it longer
because the coverage “protected” the
nape of her neck, and she liked the
weight against her shoulders. Her family
had used rubber bands or scrunchies to
pull it back but were not able to keep it
tight enough. Her mother now styles it
in a French braid every several days. It is
taut enough that Miranda likes the feel of
the pull and it keeps it off her face. She
has not pulled strands of hair from the
braid to manipulate, and as a result, hair
growth is returning to the bald spot she
had created. Miranda is in the process of
learning how to braid her own hair.
In addition, the Adolescent/Adult Sen-
sory Profile revealed a difference in Mi-
randa’s sensory-avoiding score. Her fam-
ily and peers especially noted this in social
environments. Miranda shared an interest
in having more friends (including boys),
but the thought of unexpected touch
made the possibility for close friendships
stressful to her. She went to the fall dance
with a male friend but did not hold hands
or wear the corsage he purchased for her.
Therefore, the team brainstormed for
strategies to increase her enjoyment of
the upcoming winter dance and going
out afterwards with a group.
Miranda and her mother shopped for
a long-sleeved dress with tight-fitting
gloves. This setup offered consistent pres-
sure and minimized contact with her
arms. Wearing long-sleeved and fitted
clothing has been helpful with her school
08. dunn, pp. 172-185 8/29/02 11:24 AM
FOCUS ON AUTISM AND OTHER DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES
184
wardrobe, also. Because the dance music
was loud, her date typically gained her at-
tention by tapping her on the shoulder.
Miranda asked her date to get her atten-
tion visually instead. Furthermore, she
requested that they dance at the fringe of
the group, so she could avoid bumping
into people.
After the dance, the group planned on
going to a restaurant. Miranda expressed
concern about the large size of the group
and all that it entailed (background noise,
multiple smells, people bumping into her
chair, etc.). Miranda’s family offered
strategies for addressing her sensitivity to
the smells in the restaurant. They packed
some vanilla lotion and berry-flavored lip-
stick into her purse, and encouraged her
to apply it before entering the restaurant
and intermittently during the meal (Mi-
randa enjoys and is familiar with these
scents). The proximity of the scents on
her hands and face screened out the back-
ground smells of the restaurant.
Remembering her preference to be in a
low-traffic area on the dance floor, her
date offered her a chair in an out-of-the-
way location in the restaurant. He also in-
vited a “laid-back” couple to sit near
them, thereby decreasing sensations in
her immediate environment. Miranda and
her family had also brainstormed ideas re-
garding potential home bases in the
restaurant. They decided the restroom
would be an easily accessed alternative
that would enable Miranda to further de-
crease auditory and touch sensation,
should it become problematic for her.
Her family and educators utilized sim-
ilar concepts in her home bases at home
and school. Miranda and her dad created
a special area in her room; she arranged
firm pillows so that they faced her fa-
vorite posters, and added a lava lamp. In
addition, they reviewed her music collec-
tion to explore what songs would help
her relax the most. At school, the team
utilized similar constructs by offering a
comfortable chair, headphones, and a
study carrel, to cut down on visual input.
Summary
Individuals with autism spectrum disor-
ders, including AS, have complex needs
Page 184
that often are not understood. Designing
strategies that support success often re-
quires adjustment and creativity to meet
the varying needs and strengths of indi-
viduals across a variety of contexts. A
comprehensive consideration of the indi-
vidual’s sensory patterns of performance,
the sensory-related characteristics of the
strategy, and the sensory features of the
environment is necessary for optimal ef-
fectiveness. Additional regard for the
support person creating, providing, or
implementing supports may also be a
consideration. For example, a social story
read by a father will have auditory input
different from one read by a female
paraeducator. Without consideration of
sensory processing patterns and charac-
teristics, attempts to implement effective
strategies lack the depth and individual-
ity that contribute to and support suc-
cessful daily life experiences for individu-
als with Asperger syndrome.
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Winnie Dunn, PhD, OTR, FAOTA, is profes-
sor and chairperson of the Department Occu-
pational Therapy Education at the University
of Kansas Medical Center. She has conduced ex-
tensive resarch on sensory processing, has pub-
lished many articles about the characteristics of
sensory processing in daily life, and offers guid-
ance about intervention planning. Jessica
Saiter, OTR, is a research assistant and in-
structor for the Department of Occupational
Therapy Education at the University of Kansas
Medical Center. As a service provider, she sup-
ports families of children with autism and re-
lated developmental disorders within their nat-
ural environments. Louann Rinner, MEd,
OTR, is clinical occupational therapist and co-
ordinator of occupational therapy student
training at the University of Kansas Develop-
mental Disabilities Center. Address: Winnie
Dunn, University of Kansas Medical Center,
Occupational Therapy Education, 3901 Rain-
bow Bldg., Kansas City, KS 66160-7602.
REFERENCES
Adreon, D., & Myles, B. S. (2001). Asperger
syndrome and adolescence: Practical solu-
tions for school success. Shawnee Mission, KS:
Autism Asperger Publishing.
American Psychiatric Assocation. (2000). Di-
agnostic and statistical manual of mental
disorders (4th ed., text rev.). Washington,
DC: Author.
Anderson, E., & Emmons, P. (1996). Un-
locking the mysteries of sensory dysfunction.
Arlington, TX: Future Horizons.
Asperger, H. (1944). Die ‘Autistichen Psy-
chopathen’ imkindesalter. Archiv für psy-
chiatrie und nervenkrankheiten, 117, 76–
136.
Attwood, T. (1998). Asperger’s syndrome: A
guide for parents and professionals. London:
Jessica Kingsley.
Ayres, A. J. (1972). Sensory integration and
learning disabilities. Los Angeles: Western
Psychological Services.
Ayres, A. J. (1979). Sensory intergration and
the child. Los Angeles: Western Psycholog-
ical Services.
Baranek, G. (1999). Autism during infancy: A
retrospective video analysis of sensory-
motor and social behaviors at 9–12 months
of age. Journal of Autism and Developmen-
tal Disorders, 29(3) 213–224.
Bonnet, K. A., & Goa, X. K. (1996). Apserger
syndrome in neurologic perspective. Jour-
nal of Child Neurology, 11, 483–489.
Brown, C., & Dunn, W. (2002). Adolescent/
adult sensory profile. San Antonio, TX: Psy-
chological Corp.
Brown, C., Tolefson, N., Dunn, W., Crom-
well, R., & Filion, D. (2001). The Adult
Sensory Profile: Measuring patterns of sen-
sory processing. American Journal of Oc-
cupational Therapy, 55(1), 75–82.
Cohen, D. J., & Volkmar, F. R. (Eds.).
(1997). Handbook of autism and pervasive
developmental syndromes (2nd ed.). New
York: Wiley.
Cook, D., & Dunn, W. (1998). Sensory inte-
gration for students with autism. In R. L.
Simpson & B. S. Myles (Eds.), Educating
children and youth with autism: Strategies
for effective practice (pp. 191–237). Austin:
PRO-ED.
Dunn, W. (1997). The impact of sensory pro-
cessing abilities on the daily lives of young
children and their families: A conceptual
model. Infants and Young Children, 9(4),
23–25.
Dunn, W. (1999). The sensory profile. San An-
tonio, TX: Psychological Corp.
Dunn, W. (2001). The sensations of everyday
life: Empirical, theoretical, and pragmatic
considerations. American Journal of Occu-
pational Therapy, 55, 608–620.
Dunn, W. (2002). The infant/toddler sensory
profile. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corp.
Dunn, W., & Bennett, W. (2002). Patterns of
sensory processing in children with atten-
08. dunn, pp. 172-185 8/29/02 11:24 AM
tion deficit hyperactivity disorder. Occupa-
tional Therapy Journal of Research, 22(1),
4–15.
Dunn, W., & Brown, C. (1997). Factor analy-
sis on the Sensory Profile from a national
sample of children without disabilities. The
American Journal of Occupational Therapy,
51, 490–495.
Dunn, W., & Daniels, D. (in press). Initial
development of the Infant/Toddler Sensory
Profile. Journal of Early Intervention.
Dunn, W., Myles, B. S., & Orr, S. (2002).
Sensory processing issues associated with
Asperger Syndrome: A preliminary investi-
gation. American Journal of Occupational
Therapy, 56, 97–102.
Dunn, W., & Westman, K. (1997). The Sen-
sory Profile: The performance of a national
sample without disabilities. American Jour-
nal of Occupational Therapy, 51, 25–34.
Ermer, J., & Dunn, W. (1998). The Sensory
Profile: A discriminant analysis of children
with and without disabilities. American Jour-
nal of Occupational Therapy, 52, 283–290.
Fertel-Daly, D., Bedell, G., & Hinojosa, J.
(2001). Effects of a weighted vest on at-
tention to task and self-stimulatory behav-
iors in preschoolers with pervasive devel-
opmental disorders. American Journal of
Occupational Therapy, 55, 629–640.
Fisher, A. G., Murray, E. A., & Bundy, A. C.
(1991). Sensory integration: Theory and
practice. Philadelphia: F.A. David.
Fling, E. (2000). Eating an artichoke: A
mother’s perspective on Asperger syndrome.
London: Jessica Kingsley.
Frith, E. (Ed.). (1991). Autism and Asperger
syndrome. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge Uni-
versity Press.
Gillberg, C. (1989). Apserger syndrome in
23 Swedish children. Developmental Medi-
cine of Child Neurology, 31, 520–531.
Gillberg, C. (1991). Clinical and neurobio-
logical aspects of Asperger syndrome in six
family studies. In U. Frith (Ed.), Autism
and Asperger syndrome (pp. 122–146).
Cambridge, England: Cambridge Univer-
sity Press.
Gillberg, C. L. (1992). Autism and autistic-
like conditions: Subclasses among disorders
of empathy. Journal of Child Psychology and
Psychiatry, 33, 813–842.
Page 185
VOLUME 17, NUMBER 3, FALL 2002
Gillberg, C., & Coleman, M. (1992). Biology
of the autistic syndromes (2nd ed.). London:
MacKeith.
Gray, C. (1995). Social stories unlimited: So-
cial stories and comic strip conversations.
Jennison, MI: Jennison Public Schools.
Huebner, R. A. (Ed.). (2001). Autism: A sen-
sorimotor approach to management. Gai-
thersburg, MD: Aspen.
Kientz, M., & Dunn, W. (1997). A compari-
son of children with autism and typical chil-
dren using the Sensory Profile. American
Journal of Occupational Therapy, 51, 530–
537.
Klin, A., Volkmar, F. R., & Sparrow, S. S.
(Eds.). (2001). Asperger syndrome. New
York: The Guilford Press.
Marks, S. U., Schrader, C., Tongaker, T., &
Levine, M. (2000). Portraits of three ado-
lescent students with Asperger’s syndrome:
Personal stories and how they can inform
practice. Journal of the Association for Per-
sons with Severe Handicaps, 25(1), 3–17.
McIntosh, D., Miller, L., Shyu, N., & Hager-
man, R. (1999). Sensory modulation dis-
ruption, electrodermal responses and func-
tional behaviors. Developmental Medicine
and Child Neurology, 41, 608–615.
McKelvey, J. R., Lambert, R., Mottron, L., &
Shevell, M. I. (1995). Right hemisphere
dysfunction in Asperger’s syndrome. Jour-
nal of Child Neurology, 10, 310–314.
Miller, L. J., McIntosh, D. M., McGrath, J.,
Shyu, V., Lampe, M., Taylor, A. K., Tas-
sone, F., Neitzerl, K., Stackhouse, T., &
Hagerman, R. (1999). Electrodermal re-
sponses to sensory stimuli in individuals
with Fragile X syndrome: A preliminary re-
port. American Journal of Medical Genet-
ics, 83, 268–279.
Myles, B. S., Cook, K. T., Miller, N. E., Rin-
ner, L., & Robbins, L. A. (2000). Asperger
syndrome and sensory issues: Practical solu-
tions for making sense of the world. Shawnee
Mission, KS: Autism Asperger Publishing.
Myles, B. S., & Simpson, R. L. (1998). As-
perger syndrome: A guide for educators and
parents. Austin: PRO-ED.
Myles, B. S., & Southwick, J. (1999). As-
perger syndrome and difficult moments:
Practical solutions for tantrums, rage, and
185
meltdowns. Shawnee Mission, KS: Autism
Asperger Publishing.
Shore, S. (2001). Beyond the wall: Personal ex-
periences with autism and Asperger syn-
drome. Shawnee Mission, KS: Autism As-
perger Publishing.
Stagnitti, K., Raison, P., & Ryan, P. (1999).
Sensory defensiveness: A paediatric per-
spective and case study. Australian Occu-
pational Therapy Journal, 46, 175–187.
Tatum, D. (1988). Asperger’s syndrome.
Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry,
29, 245–255.
VandenBerg, N. (2001). The use of a
weighted vest to increase on-task behavior
in children with attention difficulties. Jour-
nal of Occupational Therapy, 55, 621–628.
Volkmar, F. R. (Ed.). (1996). Psychosis and
pervasive developmental syndromes in child-
hood and adolescence. Washington, DC:
American Psychiatric Press.
Watling, R., Deitz, J., & White, O. (2001).
Comparison of Sensory Profile scores of
young children with and without autism
spectrum disorders. American Journal of
Occupational Therapy, 55, 416–423.
Weimer, A. K., Schatz, A. M., Lincoln, A.,
Ballantyner, A. O., & Trauner, D. A.
(2001). “Motor” impairment in Asperger
syndrome: Evidence for a deficit in propri-
oception. Journal of Developmental and Be-
havioral Pediatrics, 22(2), 91–101.
Wilde, L. D., Koegel, L. K., & Koegel, R. L.
(1992). Increasing success in school through
priming: A training manual. Santa Bar-
bara: University of California.
Willey, L. H. (1999). Pretending to be normal:
Living with Asperger’s syndrome. London:
Jessica Kingsley.
Wing, L. (1981). Asperger’s syndrome: A
clinical account. Psychological Medicine, 11,
115–129.
Wing, L. (1991). The relationship between
Asperger’s syndrome and Kanner’s autism.
In U. Frith (Ed.), Autism and Asperger syn-
drome (pp. 93–121). Cambridge, England:
Cambridge University Press.
Zero to Three. (1994). Diagnostic classifica-
tion of mental health and developmental dis-
orders of infancy and early childhood. Balti-
more: Author.