A review of study titled A Review of the Zones of Regulation Program

Mason, B. K., Leaf, J. B., & Gerhardt, P. F. (2024). A research review of the Zones of Regulation Program. The Journal of Special Education, 57(4), 219-229. https://doi.org/10.1177/00224669231170202

Reviewed by:
Nicole Radzilowicz, MEd, BCBA, LABA and Mary Jane Weiss PhD, BCBA-D
Endicott College and the Association for Science in Autism Treatment

Why research this topic?

Research Synopses - Psuchological, Educational and Therapeutic Interventions The Zones of Regulation is a program that is often used in educational settings to assist children, including those with autism, with social-emotional regulation (Mason et al., 2024). This program is often used with autistic children to teach the identification of emotions in themselves and others and to teach coping strategies. To this point, little research has been conducted on the Zones of Regulation; hence, little information is available about its effectiveness in teaching emotional-regulation skills to children.

Theoretically, the ability to learn emotional identification and management has wide implications for children, including autistic children. A child’s engagement in social and emotional learning programs may improve their ability to self-regulate and affect their academic achievement in the classroom as well as their successful social interactions (Durlak et al., 2011). The Zones of Regulation is a procedure that includes 18 lessons to help children develop their self-regulation skills. These lessons can be delivered in individual or small group instruction. The curriculum focuses on emotion recognition, strategies that change an individual’s physiological or emotional state, and identification of appropriate contexts for the use of the strategies.

The Zones of Regulation has become a popular intervention, and is used to target disruptive behaviors for children with autism in school settings. Although it has been widely adopted, a limited amount of research exists on the effectiveness of the Zones of Regulation to teach self-regulation skills. This article reviews the available research to determine whether the Zones of Regulation is an evidence-based practice.

What did the researchers do?

The researchers conducted a literature review of the articles related to the Zones of Regulation published between 2011 to 2021. The intention of the researchers was to review the current literature and assess whether the Zones of Regulation could be considered evidence-based. The researchers identified that they would use the American Psychological Association’s definition of Evidence-Based Practice, “integration of the best available research with clinical expertise in the context of patient characteristics, culture, and preferences” (APA Presidential Task Force on Evidence-Based Practice, 2006, p. 273); therefore, an important next step would be to assess the strength of the available research. All included articles were peer-reviewed and written in English, and were conducted from the years 2011 to 2021. The included research was evaluated based on the statistical significance of the experimental results. The researchers found three studies that met their inclusion criteria out of a pool of 37 unique studies identified in the initial search for “Zones of Regulation” in various databases. The inclusion criteria required the studies to be written in English and published in a peer reviewed journal between 2011 and 2021. Two of the studies were experimental group designs, and one was a literature review. The experimental studies included 119 participants. The participants were split between control groups and participants that received the Zones of Regulation as an intervention procedure. The level of rigor in the studies was also considered, as was the risk of bias in the study and/or the conclusions made.

What did the researchers find?

The researchers reviewed the three studies. The first study discussed by the authors Ochocki et al., (2020). This study included 63 participants and measured the results of the Zones of Regulation group against a control group that did not receive the Zones of Regulation. This study found that the group that received the Zones of Regulation intervention did not demonstrate statistically significant decreases in disruptive behavior or increases in self-control based on the information reported on the Student Risk Screening Scale (SRSS), although teacher reports did show slight improvements in participants’ level of self-control.

The second experimental study, Conklin and Jairam (2021), included 56 participants and looked at two variables: first, to identify if co-teaching the protocol was effective, and second, if higher scores would be provided on the Social, Academic, and Emotional Behavior Risk Screener (SAEBRS) for participants who received the intervention. Higher scores on the SAEBRS correlate with less risk of difficulty as measured by the screener than lower scores. Only general education students were included in the study, and students accessing special education were eliminated. The scores of the participants who received the Zones of Regulation intervention were compared to the control group of participants. The study found that the group of participants who received the Zones of Regulation intervention did have higher SAEBRS scores than the control group, but the difference was not statistically significant.

The third article included was the literature review by Romanowycz et al., (2021). This review focused on the outcomes reported in each of six studies and the risk of bias for each study. Five of the studies were categorized as having a moderate to high risk of bias, which reduces the confidence of the findings. The results of these studies varied. Some of the reviewed studies identified either no change in challenging behavior or increases in challenging following the Zones of Regulation intervention, while others reported that participants could better self-identify emotional states.

None of the articles reviewed found significant changes in the participants following the Zones of Regulation intervention. Some of the literature reviewed even indicated increases in challenging behavior following the intervention.

What are the strengths and limitations of the study?

A strength of the study was the level of rigor required for the included articles. This level of rigor increases the confidence in the findings, adding credibility to results indicating effectiveness demonstrated in the included studies. The researchers identified a variety of areas for future research. This included suggesting further research into what variables lead to increased correct responding during the intervention. It may be important to identify whether the reactions of the teacher impact an individual’s responses related to the Zones of Regulation.

The limitations of the study include that only a small number of articles met inclusion criteria for the literature review. The authors’ inclusion criteria required that the article was published between 2011 and 2021, was in English, and was peer reviewed. These inclusion criteria may have omitted other studies on the Zones of Regulation that did not meet the required level of rigor. Of the three articles included, only two articles included experimental designs that directly tested the effectiveness of the Zones of Regulation program. It is difficult to draw conclusions on whether or not a procedure is evidence-based using such a small number of studies. For the articles reviewed, demographic information was not included about how many children in the classes were neurodiverse or autistic. Additional areas for future research include examination of the level of accuracy of implementation of the Zones of Regulation curriculum; specifically, examining the differential impact of adherence to the protocol would also be intriguing. Interested people could look at the individual studies for additional information.

What do the results mean?

This review argues that the Zones of Regulation cannot be categorized as an evidence-based practice at this time. Although this intervention is frequently used with children with autism, insufficient evidence exists in the current literature. Additional research should be conducted to explore the effectiveness of the Zones of Regulation intervention; while it appeals to educators and is compatible with other educational interventions, there is not yet sufficient evidence to support its use. Although this intervention is popular in schools and other settings, it should be used with caution; it should only be used in conjunction with other evidence-based practices known to help children learn and apply these skills. Parents, caregivers, and educators should keep this in mind as they consider using the Zones of Regulation program for social emotional regulation with children with autism. There are many areas of future research for both the Zones of Regulation procedure and, more broadly, for approaches to Social Emotional Learning (SEL). Research is needed on the use of the Zones of Regulation intervention to increase coping skills and decrease instances of challenging behavior with autistic children.

Citation for this article:

Radzilowicz, N., & Weiss, M. J. (2024). Research synopsis: A review of the Zones of Regulation program. Science in Autism Treatment, 21(4).

References:

APA Presidential Task Force on Evidence-Based Practice. (2006). Evidence-based practice in psychology. American Psychologist, 61, 271-285. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003066X.61.4.271

Conklin, M., & Jairam, D. (2021). The effects of co-teaching zones of regulation on elementary students’ social, emotional, and academic risk behaviors. Advanced Journal of Social Science, 8(1), 171-192. https://doi.org/10.21467/ajss.8.1.171-192

Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P., Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D., & Schellinger, K. B. (2011). The impact of enhancing children’ social and emotional learning: A meta-analysis of school-based universal interventions. Child Development, 82(1), 405-432. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01564.x

Mason, B. K., Leaf, J. B., & Gerhardt, P. F. (2024). A research review of the Zones of Regulation program. The Journal of Special Education, 57(4), 219-229. https://doi.org/10.1177/00224669231170202

Ochocki, S., Frey, A., Patterson, D., Herron, F., Beck, N., & Dupper, D. (2020). Evaluating the Zones of Regulation® intervention to improve the self-control of elementary students. International Journal of School Social Work, 5(2), 2. https://doi.org/10.4148/2161-4148.1046

Romanowycz, L., Azar, Z., Dang, H., & Fan, Y. (2021). The effectiveness of the Zones of Regulation curriculum in improving self-regulation and/or behaviour in students. The Allied Health Scholar, 2(2).

Related ASAT Research Synopses:

Other Related ASAT Articles:

#ChallengingBehavior #OTs #Psychologists #SocialWorkers

A Research Review of the Zones of Regulation Program