Join our network of non-profits, companies and individuals who believe social change can happen through design.

Become A Member

Jesse Resnick

New York, NY, United States

Member since September 08, 2008

  • Comparison_chart_177_

    Posted is a chart comparing the characteristics of my product versus similar products currently on the market.

    Click here for a larger image.

  • Definition

    “Stereotypy or self-stimulatory behavior refers to repetitive body movements or repetitive movement of objects. This behavior is common in many individuals with developmental disabilities; however, it appears to be more common in autism. In fact, if a person with another developmental disability exhibits a form of self-stimulatory behavior, often the person is also labeled as having autistic characteristics. Stereotypy can involve any one or all senses.” Below is a list of some common stereotypic behaviours.

    Gross Motor

    • Arm flapping/waving
    • Jumping
    • Body shaking
    • Body rocking
    • Knee shaking

    Fine Motor

    • Tearing/crumpling paper/objects
    • Rhythmic finger tapping
    • Finger flexing
    • Snapping fingers
    • Lining up objects


    • Rubbing skin with hand/other objects
    • Scratching
    • Squeezing


    • Smelling objects
    • Smelling people

    Oral/Bodily Motions

    • Repetitive touching of lips/tongue
    • Repetitive fingernail biting
    • Continuous thumb sucking
    • Repetitive pulling at eyebrows
    • Prolonged/repetitive lip puckering
    • Placing objects in mouth (mouthing)
    • Licking


    • Loud humming with hands over ears
    • Repetitive ‘instrumental’ vocalizations
    • Singing words that would be spoken
    • Nonsensical syllable vocalizations
    • Tapping ears


    • Intense staring (more than 3 seconds)
    • Intense/inappropriate smile (extended periods of time)
    • Staring at lights
    • Repetitive blinking
    • Moving fingers in front of the eye


    • Koegel/Koegel, Reductions in Stereotypic Behaviour, 121.
    • http://ww...
  • During the winter break I discovered a study entitled, “Extended Reductions in Stereotypic Behaviour of Students with Autism through a Self-management Treatment Package.” It discusses a method for teaching autistic children to self-manage their stereotypic behaviours.

    Researchers studied four young children aged 9, 11, 13, and 14, with mental ages of 3-5, 3-5, 5-11, and 2-9, respectively. Each child’s stereotypic behaviours were listed and categorized. Child 3, for example, exhibited several behaviours involving loud noises, so they were defined as “singing.”

    The experiment began with treatment providers modelling the difference between stereotypic behaviour and appropriate behaviour (discrimination training) so that the children could distinguish between the two.

    The children were then given pieces of paper (each with a large printed box) and a watch that beeped at timed intervals. The children were taught to make a check mark in a box after each time interval that they did not perform any stereotypic behaviour. A treatment provider would ask, for example, to show ‘no singing,’ and start the time interval. Once the interval was over, the student was asked if they did any singing. If not, they were verbally and/or physically prompted to make a checkmark in the box, and were verbally reinforced (ex. ‘Good job!’). They were also verbally reinforced if they did sing and did not check off the box.

    Prompts were then decreased in two steps – first they were...

  • NFP Progress


    I am currently working with Margaret Poggi, the head of the Learning Spring School, as well as a few other instructors at the school. Last semester I spoke to Melissa (head of occupational therapy) about user testing. She was open to the idea, but I still need to check in with Margaret to see if it would be okay with her. I am going to schedule a meeting with Melissa next week to discuss my prototypes and user testing. See the contact information below:

    The Learning Spring School Margaret Poggi, Head of School 254 West 29th Street, 4th floor New York, NY 10001 (212) 239-4926

    Last semester I went in to an information/observation session with Jamie Pagliaro, principal of the New York Center for Autism Charter School. I have emailed him to see whether he would be open to allowing user testing. Here is his contact information:

    The New York Center for Autism Charter School Jamie Pagliaro 433 E 100th St. (in PS 50) New York, NY 10029 (212) 860-2960

    I am also working with Emily Day and Payal Panday, two students completing a doctorate in clinical psychology. I would like to speak to both of them about the ABA (Applied Behaviour Analysis) teaching method and how it can be used for my product. I have spoken with Emily, and will be calling Payal tomorrow. I do not want to put their telephone numbers up on the blog.

    In terms of testing, I plan to bring in my prototypes and see how students respond to them. As noted...

  • Review Feedback



    Click here for a larger image.

    There were lots of thoughts and ideas brought up during the review, many of which had not crossed my mind. Most of the critics that commented on materials felt that my initial ideas of silicone, Velcro, and plastic able to sustain a live hinge were a good start. It was suggested that I also explore santoprene rubber and thin polyethylene (like the kind sometimes used for Astroturf). Some material inspirations suggested were the Gumby doll (a stiff, flexible elastic material), and the work of artists like David Kroenenberg and Matthew Barney.

    A lot of the critics commented on the notion of interactivity, and felt that the designs I presented did not explore thoroughly enough. I definitely agree with this comment, and received some great suggestions and inspirations. One critic felt that the concept could be taken beyond the wristband – perhaps wrapping around the thumb, or winding down the arm, similar to a sci-fi device. He thought that the kids might respond better to something fun and different like that. He then commented on my bendable concept, and proposed that each piece could click into place, similar to the way Barbie doll joints work. Another critic suggested looking at puzzle/strategy games, like the Rubix Cube. Someone suggested engaging forms - a bubble that when pushed, would blow up on the other side; a series of rings that could twist, and a contour tracing device.

    Some inspirational products mentioned were Indian bracelets...

  • Thesis Board



    Larger image here.

  • Designing Arguments



    Larger image here.

  • Stakeholder Needs



    Larger image here.

  • Similar Products



    I created a diagram of products on the market that serve similar functions. None of them are specifically geared towards autistic people, but there are many similarities in the way the function and the materials they are made of. Click here for a larger image.

    Some more relatively similar products that reduce stress/promote well being/facilitate repetitive behaviours:

    -Stress Balls -Massages/Yoga -Bop-It (toy) -Sudoku/Crosswords -TV -Origami -Video Games -Rubik's Cube -Aromatherapy/Incense

    Material Qualities I am Interested in Applying:

    -Soft -Fabric -Simple -Foam -Quiet -Gentle -Safe/Calming/Soothing -Flexible -Sensorial -Squishy -Safe

    Potential Materials:

    -felt -wool -rubber -plastic -polyurethane foam -jersey -silicone rubber -cotton -non-toxic -breathable -flexible -resilient

    Possible Manufacturing Methods:

    -injection moulding -casting -rotational moulding -sewing -gluing/binding -crimping -knitting -weaving -extrusion -sanding -vacuum forming

    Methods of Distribution:

    -manufacturer to distributor to school district to school to teacher to student -manufacturer to distributor to toy store to parent to child -manufacture to distributor to non-profit to school to teacher to student -manufacturer to distributor to website distributor to parent to child

  • Common_treatment_methods_of_ssb_177_

    I have done a fair amount of research into the various treatment methods of self-stimulatory behaviours (these are behaviours that autistic individuals perform often and repetitively, such as arm flapping, pen flicking, hair twirling, squeezing, mouthin, etc). The majority of these methods seem to teach the child that their behaviour is wrong, and that it must be corrected. Most of the methods involve some sort of punishment, whether physical (like a slap) or emotional (like a time out). Most of the articles these ideas are coming from were written between 1970-1990, so there have obviously been some changes in the way treatment is administered. Today, physical punishment is strayed away from and is always discussed and agreed upon with parents. In extreme cases, it may still be used when necessary.

    Time out-like methods are still used when a child is having a lot of difficulty focusing. Most commonly, educators today attempt to interrupt the child and redirect his/her attention to something else. This is often a very effective method for stopping the behaviour, but it seems very tedious to constantly have to stop and redirect a child each time he/she loses focus.

    I am proposing a way to teach children that there are appropriate times to engage in these behaviours. This way, the child would be able to integrate self-stimulatory behaviours into their daily schedule so it would not be a constant interruption. This would allow children to focus more effectively, without cons...

My Interests

  • Industrial Design
  • Environmental Design
  • Communication Design
  • Fashion Design
  • Audio/Visual Design