The development and utilization of a scale to measure adolescents' attitudes toward peers who use augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) devices

Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research

Volumn 53, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 572-587

  Beck, Ann R ^a   Thompson, James R ^a   Kosuwan, Kullaya ^b   Prochnow, Jessica M ^c  

^a ILLINOIS STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b SRINAKHARINWIROT UNIVERSITY   (Thailand)

^c Illinois Neurological Institute   (United States)

Author keywords

AAC device type; Adolescents' attitudes; Familiarity with disabilities; Gender

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ARTICLE; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMMUNICATION AID; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; PEER GROUP; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; PSYCHOMETRY; QUESTIONNAIRE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; RECOGNITION; REPRODUCIBILITY; SEX DIFFERENCE; VALIDATION STUDY; VIDEORECORDING;

ADOLESCENT; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; COMMUNICATION AIDS FOR DISABLED; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; PEER GROUP; PSYCHOMETRICS; QUESTIONNAIRES; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SEX FACTORS; VIDEO RECORDING;

EID: 77953337390     PISSN: 10924388     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1044/1092-4388(2009/07-0140)     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. ABC News Productions. (2002, May 17). Nightline: Miles' bar mitzvah [Television broadcast]. New Hudson, MI: ABC News.
2. Altenberg, E., & Ferrand, C. (2006). Perception of individuals with voice disorders by monolingual English, bilingual Cantonese-English and bilingual Russian-English women. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 49, 879-887.
3. Barnett, M. (1987). Adolescents' evaluation of peers' motives for helping. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 16, 579-586.
4. Beck, A., Bock, S., Thompson, J., & Kosuwan, K. (2002). The influence of communicative competence and AAC technique on children's attitudes toward a peer who uses AAC. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 18, 217-227.
5. Beck, A., & Dennis, M. (1996). Attitudes of children toward a similar-aged child who uses augmentative communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 12, 78-87.
6. Beck, A., Fritz, H., Keller, A., & Dennis, M. (2000). Attitudes of school-aged children toward their peers who use AAC. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 16, 13-26.
7. Beck, A., Kingsbury, K., Neff, A., & Dennis, M. (2000). The influence of length of augmented message on children's attitudes toward peers who use AAC. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 16, 239-249.
8. Beck, A., Thompson, J., Clay, S., Hutchins, M., Vogt, P., Romaniak, B., ... Sokolowski, B. (2001). Preservice professionals' attitudes toward children who use augmentative/ alternative communication. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 36, 255-271.
9. Bedrosian, J., Hoag, L., Calculator, S., & Molineux, B. (1992). Variables influencing perceptions of the communicative competence of an adult augmentative and alternative communication system user. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 35, 1105-1113.
10. Beukelman, D. R., & Mirenda, P. (2005). Augmentative and alternative communication: Management of severe communication disorders in children and adults (3rd ed.). Baltimore: Brookes.
11. Blockberger, S., Armstrong, R., O'Connor, A., & Freeman, R. (1993). Children's attitudes toward a nonspeaking child using various augmentative and alternative communication techniques. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 9, 243-250.
12. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
13. Conti-Ramsden, G., & Botting, N. (2004). Social difficulties and victimization in children with SLI at 11 years of age. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 47, 145-161.
14. Cook, B. G., & Semmel, M. I. (1999). Peer acceptance of included students with disabilities as a function of severity of disability and classroom composition. The Journal of Special Education, 33, 50-61.
15. Dudek, K., Beck, A., & Thompson, J. (2006). The influence of AAC device type, dynamic vs. static screen, on peer attitudes. Journal of Special Education Technology, 21, 17-23.
16. Dynavox. Dynavox: Breaking through the barriers [Videotape]. Pittsburgh, PA: Author.
17. Eddleston, K., Veiga, J., & Powell, G. (2006). Explaining sex differences in managerial career satisfier preferences: The role of gender self-schema. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 437-445. Retrieved from http://gateway.ut.ovid.com/ gwl/ovidweb.cgi.
18. Faux, C., & Bayles, K. A. (2000). Telerounds #52: Augmentative alternative communication and persons with multiple disabilities: A clinical perspective [Videotape]. Rockville, MD: American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.
19. Ferguson, J. M. (1998). High school students' attitudes toward inclusion of handicapped students in the regular education classroom. Educational Forum, 63, 173-179.
20. Fisher, D., Pumpian, I., & Sax, C. (1998). High school students' attitudes about and recommendations for their peers with significant disabilities. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 23, 272-282.
21. Gorenflo, C., & Gorenflo, D. (1991). The effects of information and augmentative communication technique on attitudes toward nonspeaking individuals. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 34, 19-26.
22. Gorenflo, D., & Gorenflo, C. (1997). Effects of synthetic speech, gender, and perceived similarity on attitudes toward the augmented communicator. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 13, 87-91.
23. Gorenflo, C., Gorenflo, D., & Santer, S. (1994). Effects of synthetic voice output on attitudes toward the augmented communicator. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 37, 64-68.
24. Hardman, M. L., & Clark, C. (2006). Promoting friendship through Best Buddies: A national survey of college program participants. Mental Retardation, 44, 56-63.
25. Hoag, L., & Bedrosian, J. (1992). Effects of speech output type, message length, and reauditorization on perceptions of the communicative competence of an adult AAC user. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 35, 1363-1366.
26. Hoag, L., Bedrosian, J., Johnson, D., & Molineux, B. (1994). Variables affecting perceptions of social aspects of the communicative competence of an adult AAC user. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 10, 129-137.
27. Hymel, S. (1986). Interpretations of peer behavior: Affective bias in childhood and adolescence. Child Development, 57, 431-445.
28. Krajewski, J. J., & Flaherty, T. (2000). Attitudes of high school students toward individuals with mental retardation. Mental Retardation, 38, 154-162.
29. Kraus, S. (1995). Attitudes and the prediction of behavior: A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 58-75.
30. Lallh, A., & Rochet, A. P. (2000). The effect of information on listeners' attitudes toward speakers with voice or resonance disorders. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 43, 782-795.
31. Lilienfeld, M., & Alant, E. (2002). Attitudes of children toward an unfamiliar peer using an AAC device with and without voice output. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 18, 91-101.
32. McCarthy, J., & Light, J. (2005). Attitudes toward individuals who use augmentative and alternative communication: Research review. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 21, 41-55.
33. McDougall, J., DeWit, D., King, G., Miller, L., & Killip, S. (2004). High school-aged youth's attitudes toward their peers with disabilities: The role of school and student interpersonal factors. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 51, 287-301. doi:10.1080/ 1034912042000259242. (Pubitemid 39196571)
34. Meyers, M. (2007). Mike Meyers' A+ guide to managing and troubleshooting PCs (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill/ Osborne.
35. Nowicki, E., & Sandieson, R. (2002). A meta-analysis of school-age children's attitudes towards persons with physical or intellectual disabilities. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 49, 243-265. doi:10.1080/1034912022000007270.
36. Patterson, J., & Pring, T. (1991). Listeners attitudes to stuttering speakers: No evidence for a gender difference. Journal of Fluency Disorders, 16, 201-205. doi:10.1016/ 0094-730X(91)90002-T.
37. Prentke Romich Company. (n.d.). Minspeak: For now ... for later ... for ever! [Videotape]. Wooster, OH: Author.
38. Rosenbaum, R., Armstrong, R., & King, S. (1986). Children's attitudes toward disabled peers: A self-report measure. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 11, 517-530.
39. Ryan, K. (1981). Developmental differences in reactions to the physically disabled. Human Development, 24, 240-256.
40. Schiavetti, N., & Metz, D. (1997). Evaluation research in communicative disorder. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
41. Seitz, S., Lord, C., & Taylor, C. (2007). Beyond pleasure: Emotion activity affects the relationship between attitudes and behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 933-947. doi:10.1177/0146167207301025.
42. Smith, M. (2005). The dual challenges of aided communication and adolescence. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 21, 67-79.
43. Snyder, G. (2001). Exploratory research in the measurement and modification of attitudes toward stuttering. Journal of Fluency Disorders, 16, 149-160. doi:10.1016/S0094-730X(01)00092-94
44. Triandis, H. C. (1971). Attitudes and attitude change. New York: Wiley.
45. Young, M. (1993). Supplementing tests of statistical significance: Variation accounted for. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 36, 644-656.