|
|
|
Research Articles on Symbols
|
|
|
Usefulness of Symbols
|
Charlop, C., Carpenter, M., LeBlanc, L.
& Kellet, K. (2002). Using the picture exchange
communication system (PECS) with children with autism: Assessment of PECS
acquisition, speech, social-communicative behavior and problem behavior.
Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 35: 213-231.
This study determined that PECS increases spontaneous natural speech. |
|
Doss, L. Scott, Locke, Peggy Ann, Johnston, Susan S. et. al
(1991). Initial Comparison of the Efficiency of a Variety
of AAC Systems for Ordering Meals in Fast Food Restaurants. AAC
Augmentative and Alternative communication, 7, 256-261.
This study compared the efficiency and effectiveness of a pocket-sized
communication book with PCS and the Light Talker with ECHO speech synthesis for
ordering in fast food restaurants. The result showed the Light Talker to be
less efficient and less effective than the manual picture wallet. The clerks
requested more clarifications and the order time was longer with the Light
Talker. Also, more questions were asked directly to the user of the wallet than
with the Light Talker (where clerks tended to ask someone else).
Address reprint requests to: Joe Reichle, Ph.D., Dept. of Communication
Disorders, U. of Minnesota, 115 Shevlin Hall, 164 Pillsbury Drive S.E.,
Minneapolis, MN 55455.
|
|
Durand, V. Mark (1993) Functional
Communication Training Using Assistive Devices: Effects on Challenging Behavior
and Affect. AAC Augmentative and Alternative Communication,
9, 168-176.
This study evaluated the effectiveness of functional communication training as
an intervention for the aggression, self-injury, and tantrums exhibited by
three students. Assistive devices were used to augment their communicative
skills. Data collected indicated that not only did the students use their
devices successfully, but the intervention also reduced their challenging
behavior. Students also displayed increased positive facial expression.
Address reprint requests to: V. Mark Durand, Dept. of Psychology, State
University of New York, 1400 Washington Ave., Albany, NY 12222, USA.
|
|
Johnston, Susan, Nelson,Catherine, Evans, Joanne and
Palazolo, Kristie (2003) The Use of Visual Supports in
Teaching Young Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder to Initiate Interactions.
AAC Augmentative and Alternative Communication 19, 86-103.
Three preschool-aged children with autism spectrum disorder were taught to use
the question “Can I play?” in PCS to ask for entrance into play
activities. Results showed that the intervention strategy was effective for all
three children. The majority of the teachers felt that the time required to
implement the strategy was worth the benefits. Benefits included increased
on-task time.
Corresponding author. Tel: 801-581-5187. Fax: 801-585-6476. E-mail:
Johnst_S@utah.edu
|
Miranda, P. (November 2003).
Using AAC to reduce problem behavior. In Augmentative Communication
News, Volume 15, #4 (issue on Autism Spectrum Disorders).
“After introducing Alec (17 years old) to the schedule and choice system
(using PCS) his aggressive behavior decreased from an average of 23 severe
aggressive episodes per month at baseline to near-zero levels over the
subsequent 21 months when data were collected. Three years after the
intervention, Alec continues to use his schedule and choice system and his
aggression is no longer evident. The use of AAC supports had a dramatic effect
on Alec’s functional communication and his quality of life, as well as on
the quality of life of those providing him with support.”
For a copy of this issue, contact ACN, 1 Surf Way, #237, Monterey, CA 93940,
www.augcominc.com, Sarahblack@aol.com |
- Mirenda, P. (November 2003). Using AAC to support
expression, language comprehension and emotional regulation. In
Augmentative Communication News, Volume 15, #4, (issue on autism spectrum
Disorders).
Rachel (6 years old and diagnosed with PDS-NOS) was making a transition into an
integrated kindergarten setting at the time of the intervention. The staff
provided her with:
-
a) Expressive language visual supports (using the PCS). These were to use
during activities within the typical kindergarten curriculum, so that she could
share information or comment.
b) Receptive language visual supports (using PCS) and strategies. These were to
clarify multi-step classroom activities and to heighten her comprehension of
oral instructions.
c) Organization and emotional regulation visual supports (using PCS). These
included across-task schedules, and an emotion wheel.
- “By the time Rachel entered first grade, she had made gains in
expressive communication, and now comments about events in her journal. She has
also increased her use of novel sentence structures. She continues to rely on
sentence assembly supports during some class activities.
She can now independently follow multi-step activities, using a symbol schedule
to cue her. She no longer requires verbal prompting or multiple repetitions of
instructions.
Rachel’s overall organization and emotional regulation abilities have
improved. She uses her across-task schedule board, the emotion sheet, and
spontaneously request self-soothing activities.”
For a copy of this issue, contact ACN, 1 Surf Way, #237, Monterey, CA 93940,
www.augcominc.com, Sarahblack@aol.com
|
|
Rotholz, David A., Berkowitz, Susan F. (1989)
Functionality of Two Modes of Communication in the Community by Students with
Developmental Disabilities: A Comparison of Signing and Communication Books.
Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 14, 227-233.
This study examined the functionality of signs and iconic communication book
symbols (the PCS) in community settings with two students with autism. The
results of this investigation revealed that neither student communicated
functionally (i.e. made successful requests) in community settings using sign
language. After receiving communication book training at school, both students
generalized their new communication skills to different settings and persons
and successfully requested items of their choice at McDonald’s.
Address reprint requests to: David A. Rotholz, Ph.D., The New England Center
for Autism, 33 Turnpike Rd., Southboro, MA 01772.
|
|
Rowland, Charity, Schweigert, Philip (1989)
Tangible Symbols: Symbolic Communication for Individuals with Multisensory
Impairments. AAC Augmentative and Alternative Communication,
5, 226-234.
This study includes a sequence of communication development that accommodates
the use of tangible symbols (objects or pictures) and two brief case histories
illustrating the acquisition of tangible symbol systems by individuals with
multisensory impairments. Data is also presented on the progress of nine
individuals who were taught to use tangible symbols. Most participants entered
the Tangible Symbols project with no means of symbolic communication, and
concluded the project with a viable communication system consisting of
manipulable object or picture symbols.
Address reprint requests to: Charity Rowland, Ph.D., Oregon Research Institute,
1899 Willamette, Suite 2, Eugene, OR 97401, USA.
|
|
Rett Syndrome: Studies have been
done by Dr. David A. Koppenhaver, Ph.D., concerning the use of AAC devices in
conjunction with storybooks to increase communication in children with Rett
syndrome. All of the children showed an increased range of communication,
including increased eye pointing and AAC use. It was also felt that the
children demonstrated emergent literacy knowledge.
For more information contact Dr. Koppenhaver at Gustavus Adolphus College,
Education Dept, 800 W. College Ave., St. Peter, MN 56082.
|
|
Comparisons of Symbol Sets
|
|
Bloomberg, Karen, Karlan, George, R., and Lloyd, Lyle L.
(1990). The Comparative Translucency of Initial Lexical
Items Represented in Five Graphic Symbol Systems and Sets. Journal of
Speech and Hearing Research, 33, 717-725.
The comparative translucency of five symbols sets (Blissymbols, Picsyms, PIC,
PCS, and Rebus) representing three parts of speech (nouns, verbs, and
modifiers) was investigated. Undergraduate college students rated 41 items on a
7-point scale of iconicity. Rebus and PCS were the most translucent overall;
however, a number of Blissymbolics, Picsyms, and PIC symbols were also rated as
highly translucent.
Address reprint requests to: George R. Karlan, Special Education, SCCC-E,
Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907
|
|
Huer, Mary B. (2000). Examining
perceptions of graphic symbols across cultures: Preliminary study of the impact
of culture/ethnicity, Augmentative and Alternative
Communication, 16, 180-185.
Three graphic symbol sets (PCS, Blissymbolics and DynaSyms) were compared for
translucency with 147 adults. These adults were from four ethnic/cultural
backgrounds: European/American, Mexican, Chinese, and African-American. The
subjects were asked to identify 41 symbols from each of the three symbol sets.
It was found that symbols were perceived differently by persons from different
backgrounds. The PCS were found to be the most translucent, while the
Blissymbols were found to be the least translucent for all four ethnic groups.
Address reprint requests to: Mary Blake Huer, Dept. of Speech Communication,
CSU - Fullerton, P.O. Box 6868, Fullerton, CA 92834-6868, USA
|
|
Mirenda, Pat, and Locke, Peggy A. (1989) A
Comparison of Symbol Transparency in Nonspeaking Persons with Intellectual
Disabilities. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 54, 131-140.
The transparency of 11 different types of symbols representing objects with 40
nonspeaking subjects who experienced various degree of intellectual disability
was studied. The symbol sets included nonidentical objects, miniature objects,
identical colored photographs, nonidentical colored photographs, black and
white photographs, PCS, Picsyms, Rebus, Self-Talk, Blissymbols, and written
words. Real objects were found to be the most readily recognized and
Blissymbols and written words the most difficult. A hierarchy of difficulty was
found for the other symbol sets assessed.
Address reprint requests to: Pat Mirenda, Ph.D., Dept. of Communication
Disorders, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, 202 Barkley Memorial Center,
Lincoln, NE 68583.
|
|
Mizuko, Mark (1987). Transparency and
Ease of Learning of Symbols Represented by Blissymbols, PCS, and Picsyms,
AAC Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 3, 129-136.
The symbol sets were studied to determine if normally developing 3-year-old
children showed any significant differences in terms of the transparency and
learning rate of the symbols. PCS and Picsyms were more transparent and easier
to learn than Blissymbols, regardless of the symbol category.
Address reprint requests to: Mark Mizuko, Ph.D., Dept of Communication Sciences
& Disorders, University of Minnesota Duluth, 221 Bohannon Hall, 1207 Ordean
Court, Duluth, MN 55812.
|
|
Mizuko, Mark, Reichle, Joe (1989). Transparency
and Recall of Symbols Among Intellectually Handicapped Adults. Journal
of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 54, 627-633.
This investigation studied and compared the transparency and recall of symbols
from the Blissymbols, PCS, and Picsyms symbol sets among adults with
intellectual handicaps. Three parts of speech (nouns, verbs, descriptors) were
studied. Subjects correctly identified significantly fewer Blissymbols
representing nouns than either PCS or Picsyms. In the early stages of recall
for nouns, PCS and Picsyms were significantly easier to recall than
Blissymbols.
Address reprint requests to: Mark Mizuko, Ph.D., Dept of Communication
Sciences & Disorders, University of Minnesota Duluth, 221 Bohannon Hall,
1207 Ordean Court, Duluth, MN 55812.
|
|
Miscellaneous AAC Studies
|
|
Cress, Cynthia J. and Marvin, Christine A. (Dec. 2003)
Common questions about AAC Services in Early Intervention. AAC
Augmentative and Alternative Communication 19, 254-272.
The following common questions relating to AAC were answered and substantiated
with references to multiple research studies.
How early can AAC interventions begin? What prerequisites are necessary?
Will the use of AAC interfere with a child’s vocal development?
Will this child talk?
Where is the best place to start early AAC intervention?
Is it necessary to understand specific concepts/vocabulary before that
vocabulary can be used for communication?
What should be done if the child’s AAC attempts are inappropriate,
confusing or random?
How can communication systems be moved beyond a single word level?
Are voice output systems considered better than low-tech picture selection
systems?
Why does the child seldom initiate communication with an AAC system?
Corresponding authors. Cynthia Cress or Chris Marvin, 202 Barkley Memorial
Center, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, Nebraska 68683-0732, USA.
Tel: 402-472-3956. Fax: 402-472-7697. Email: ccressl@unl.edu and
cmarvinl@unl.edu..
|
Mirenda, P. (2001) Autism,
augmentative communication and assistive technology: What do we really know?
Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 16: 141-151.
The author found no evidence that low- or high-tech AAC approaches interfered
with the speech development of individuals with ASD. |
Mirenda, P. & Erickson, K. (2000).
Augmentative communication and literacy. In A. Wetherby and B.
Prizant, Autism Spectrum Disorders. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing
Co.
Includes a discussion of the benefits of using AAC devices with individuals
with autism. |
Parsons, C. & LaSorte, D. (1993).
The effect of computers with synthesized speech and no speech on the
spontaneous communication of children with autism. Australian Journal
of Human Communication Disorders. 21: 12-31.
Computer-based instruction with synthetic speech output increases natural
speech production more than computer-based instruction without speech output. |
Romski, M.A. & Seveik, R.A. (1996).
Breaking the Speech Barrier: Language Development through Augmented Means.
Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.
Includes a discussion of the benefits of using AAC devices with individuals
with autism. |
Schepis, M., Reid, D., Behrmann, M. &
Sutton, K. 91998). Increasing communication interactions of
young children with autism using a voice output communication aid and
naturalistic teaching. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 31:
461-478.
Four preschool children with autism were taught to use speech generating
devices to request, make social comments and respond to questions in a
contextually appropriate and spontaneous manner. |
|
|