Examining perceptions of graphic symbols across cultures: Preliminary study of the impact of culture/ethnicity

AAC: Augmentative and Alternative Communication

Volumn 16, Issue 3, 2000, Pages 180-185

  Huer, Mary Blake ^a  

^a CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CODES (SYMBOLS); SOCIAL ASPECTS; SPEECH COMMUNICATION;

AUGMENTATIVE AND ALTERNATIVE COMMUNICATION (AAC); GRAPHIC SYMBOLS;

COMMUNICATION AIDS FOR NONVOCAL PERSONS;

EID: 0034269322     PISSN: 07434618     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/07434610012331279034     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Bedrosian, J. L. (1995). Limitations in the use of nondisabled participants in AAC research. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 11, 6-10.
2. Beukelman, D., & Mirenda, P. (1998). Augmentative and alternative communication: Management of severe communication dis-orders in children and adults (2nd ed.). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
3. Bloomberg, K., Karlan, G. R., & Lloyd, L. (1990). The comparative translucency of initial lexical items represented by five graphic symbol systems. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 33, 717-725.
4. Brown, R. (1977, May-June). Why are signed languages easier to learn than spoken languages? Keynote address at the National Association of the Deaf Symposium on Sign Language Research and Teaching, Chicago, IL.
5. Carmeli, S., & Shen, Y. (1998). Semantic transparency and translucency in compound Blissymbols. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 14, 171-183.
6. Fuller, D. R., & Lloyd, L. L. (1987). A study of physical and semantic characteristics of a graphic symbol system as predictors of perceived complexity. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 3, 26-35.
7. Fuller, D., & Lloyd, L. (1991). Toward a common usage of iconicity terminology. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 7, 215-220.
8. Fuller, D., Lloyd, L., & Schlosser, R. (1992). Further development of an augmentative and alternative communication symbol taxonomy. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 8, 67-74.
9. Fuller, D., Lloyd, L., & Stratton, M. (1997). Aided AAC symbols. In L. Lloyd, D. Fuller, and H. Arvidson (Eds.), Augmentative and alternative communication: Handbook of principles and practice (pp. 48-79). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
10. Hetzroni, O. E., & Harris, O. L. (1996). Cultural aspects in the development of AAC users. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 12, 52-58.
11. Higginbotham, D. J. (1995a). Use of nondisabled participants in AAC research: Confessions of a research infidel. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 11, 2-5.
12. Higginbotham, D. J. (1995b). Subject selection in AAC research: Decision points. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 11, 11-13.
13. Huer, M. B. (1994, November). Diversity now: Multicultural issues in AAC. Miniseminar presented at the National Annual Meeting for the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, New Orleans, LA.
14. Huer, M. B. (1997). Culturally inclusive assessments for children using augmentative and alternative communication (AAC). Journal of Children's Communication Development, 19 (1), 23-34.
15. Johnson, R. (1994). The Picture Communication Symbols combination book. Solana Beach, CA: Mayer-Johnson.
16. Mauchly, J. W. (1940). Significance test for sphericity of a normal n-variate distribution. Annuals of Mathematical Statistics, 11, 204-209.
17. McNaughton, S. (1993). Graphic representational systems and lit-eracy learning. Topics in Language Disorders, 13, 58-75.
18. McNaughton, S. (1998). Reading acquisition of adults with severe congenital speech and physical impairments: Theoretical infrastructure, empirical investigation, and educational application. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
19. McNaughton, S., & Lindsay, P. H. (1995). Approaching literacy with AAC graphics. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 11, 212-228.
20. Mizuko, M. (1987). Transparency and ease of learning of symbols represented by Blissymbolics, PCS, and Picsyms. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 3, 129-136.
21. Nakamura, K., Newell, A., Aim, N., & Waller, A. (1998). How do members of different language communities compose sentences with a picture-based communication system? A cross-cultural study of picture-based sentences constructed by English and Japanese speakers. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 14, 71-79.
22. Soto, G., Huer, M. B., & Taylor, O. (1997). Multicultural issues. In L. L. Lloyd, D. H. Fuller, & H. H. Arvidson (Eds.), Augmentative and alternative communication: Handbook of principles and practice (pp. 406-413). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
23. SPSS, Inc. (1999). SPSS for Windows (Release 10.0). Chicago, IL: Author.
24. Wood, C., Storr, J., & Reich, P. (1992). The complete Blissymbol reference guide. Toronto, ON: Blissymbolics Communication International.