The fruitfulness of a nomothetic approach to investigating AAC: Comparing two speech encoding schemes across cerebral palsied and nondisabled children

American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology

Volumn 12, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 110-120

  Hochstein, Dave D ^a   McDaniel, Mark A ^a   Nettleton, Sandra ^c   Neufeld, Katherine Hannah ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO   (United States)

^b Clayton County Public Schools   (United States)

^c Logan Hall ^*

Author keywords

Augmentative and alternative communication (AAC); Coding schemes; Comparing nondisabled and CP children; Individual differences versus group performance; Vocabulary acquisition across two AAC devices

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; AUGMENTATIVE AND ALTERNATIVE COMMUNICATION SYSTEM; CEREBRAL PALSY; CHILD; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DEVICE; DISABILITY; ERROR; EVALUATION; FEMALE; HUMAN; LINGUISTICS; MALE; SPEECH DISORDER;

EID: 0037301201     PISSN: 10580360     EISSN: 15589110     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1044/1058-0360(2003/057)     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Bedrosian, J. L. (1995). Limitations in the use of nondisabled subjects in AAC research. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 11, 6-10.
2. Bellugi, U., & Klima, E. (1976). Two faces of sign: Iconic and abstract. In S. Harnad, H. Steklis, & J. Lancaster (Eds.), The origins and evolution of language and speech (pp. 514-538). New York: Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.
3. Beukelman, D. R., & Mirenda, P. (1992). Serving young children with AAC needs. In Augmentative & alternative communication: Management of severe communication disorders in children and adults (pp. 175-202). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
4. Bloomberg, K., Karlan, G., & Lloyd, 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.
5. Dunn, L., & Dunn, L. (1981). Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-Revised. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
6. Estes, W., & Wessel, C. (1966). Reaction time in relation to display size and correctness of responses in forced-choice visual signal detection. Perception & Pyschophysics, 1, 369-373.
7. Franklin, K., Mirenda, P., & Phillips, G. (1996). Comparisons of five symbol assessment protocols with nondisabled preschoolers and learners with severe intellectual disabilities. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 12, 63-77.
8. Higginbotham, D. J. (1995). Use of nondisabled subjects in AAC research: Confessions of a research infidel. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 11, 2-5.
9. Higginbotham, D. J., & Bedrosian, J. L. (1995). Subject selection in AAC research: Decision points. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 11, 11-13.
10. Johnson, R. (1981). The picture communication symbols, Book I. Solano Beach, CA: Mayer-Johnson.
11. Johnson, R. (1986a). The picture communication symbols, Book II. Solano Beach, CA: Mayer-Johnson.
12. Johnson, R. (1986b). The picture communication symbols, Book III. Solano Beach, CA: Mayer-Johnson.
13. Kelford Smith, A., Thurston, S., Light, J., Parnes, P., & O'Keefe, B. (1989). The form and use of written communication produced by nonspeaking physically disabled individuals using microcomputers. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 5, 115-124.
14. Lanspa, A. L., Wood, L. A., & Beukelman, D. R. (1997). Efficiency with which disabled and nondisabled students locate words in cue windows: Study of three organizational strategies - frequency of word use, word length, and alphabetic order. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 13, 117-124.
15. Light, J., Lindsay, P., Siegel, L., & Parnes, P. (1990). The effects of message encoding techniques on recall by literate adults using AAC systems. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 6, 184-201.
16. McDaniel, M. A., Neufeld, K. H., & Damico-Nettleton, S. (2001). Many-to-one and one-to-many associative learning in a naturalistic task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 7, 182-194.
17. Mirenda, P. (1985). Designing pictorial communication systems for physically able-bodied students with severe handicaps. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 1, 58-64.
18. Mizuko, M., & Reichle, J. (1989). Transparency and recall of symbols among intellectually handicapped adults. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 54, 627-633.
19. Schlosser, R. W., & Lloyd, L. L. (1993). Effects of initial element teaching in a story-telling context on Blissymbol acquisition and generalization. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 36, 979-995.
20. Sevcik, R. A., Romski, M. A., & Wilkinson, K. M. (1991). Roles of graphic symbols in the language acquisition process for persons with severe cognitive disabilities. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 7, 161-170.
21. Spradlin, J. E., & Saunders, R. R. (1986). The development of stimulus classes using match-to-sample procedures: Sample classification versus comparison classification. Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 6, 41-58.
22. Underwood, B. J., & Schulz, R. W. (1960). Meaningfulness and verbal learning. Philadelphia: Lippincott.
23. Yovetich, W. S., & Young, T. A. (1988). The effects of representativeness and concreteness on the "guessability" of Blissymbols. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 4, 35-39.