Comparing Acquisition, Generalization, Maintenance, and Preference Across Three AAC Options in Four Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder

Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities

Volumn 27, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 323-339

  McLay, Laurie ^a   van der Meer, Larah ^b   Schäfer, Martina C M ^a   Couper, Llyween ^a   McKenzie, Emma ^a   O’Reilly, Mark F ^c   Lancioni, Giulio E ^d   Marschik, Peter B ^e,f   Green, Vanessa A ^b   Sigafoos, Jeff ^b   Sutherland, Dean ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CANTERBURY   (New Zealand)

^b VICTORIA UNIVERSITY OF WELLINGTON   (New Zealand)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF BARI   (Italy)

^e MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF GRAZ   (Austria)

^f KAROLINSKA INSTITUTE   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Augmentative and alternative communication; Autism spectrum disorder; Generalization; Maintenance; Manual signing; Picture exchange; Preference; Requesting; Speech generating device

Indexed keywords

EID: 84953367475     PISSN: 1056263X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10882-014-9417-x     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Achmadi, D., Sigafoos, J., van der Meer, L., Sutherland, D., Lancioni, G. E., O’Reilly, M. F., Hodis, F., Green, V. A., McLay, L., & Marschik, P. B. (2014). Acquisition, preference, and follow-up data on the use of three AAC options by four boys with developmental disability/delay. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 26, 565–583.
2. Boesch, M., Wendt, O., Subramanian, A., & Hsu, N. (2013). Comparative efficacy of the Picture Exchange Communication System (PECS) versus a speech-generating device: effects on requesting skills. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 7, 480–493.
3. Couper, L., van der Meer, L., Schaefer, M., McKenzie, E., McLay, L., O’Reilly, M., Lancioni, G., Marschik, P. B., Sigafoos, J., & Sutherland, D. (2014). Comparing acquisition of and preference for manual signs, picture exchange, and speech-generating devices in nine children with autism spectrum disorder. Developmental Neurorehabilitation, 17, 99–109.
4. Duker, P., Didden, R., & Sigafoos, J. (2004). One-to-one training: Instructional procedures for learners with developmental disabilities. Austin: Pro-ed.
5. Flores, M., Musgrove, K., Renner, S., Hinton, V., Stroizer, S., Franklin, S., & Hil, D. (2012). A comparison of communication using the Apple iPad and a picture-based system. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 28, 1–11.
6. Gevarter, C., O’Reilly, M., Rojeski, L., Sammarco, N., Lang, R., Lancioni, G., & Sigafoos, J. (2013). Comparing communication systems for individuals with developmental disabilities: a review of single-case research studies. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 34, 4415–4432.
7. Hains, A. H., & Baer, D. M. (1989). Interaction effects in multielement designs: inevitable, desirable, and ignorable. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 22, 57–69.
8. Halle, J. W. (1987). Teaching language in the natural environment: an analysis of spontaneity. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 12, 28–37.
9. Kagohara, D. M., van der Meer, L., Ramdoss, S., O’Reilly, M. F., Lancioni, G. E., Davis, T. N., Rispoli, M., Lang, R., Marschik, P. B., Sutherland, D., Green, V. A., & Sigafoos, J. (2013). Using iPods and iPads in teaching programs for individuals with developmental disabilities: a systematic review. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 34, 147–156.
10. Kennedy, C. (2005). Single-case designs for educational research. Boston: Pearson.
11. Lancioni, G. E., O’Reilly, M. F., Cuvo, A. J., Singh, N. N., Sigafoos, J., & Didden, R. (2007). PECS and VOCAs to enable students to make requests: an overview of the literature. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 28, 468–488.
12. Lorah, E. R., Tincani, M., Dodge, J., Gilroy, S., Hickey, A., & Hantula, D. (2013). Evaluating picture exchange and the iPad as a speech generating device to teach communication to young children with autism. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 25, 637–649.
13. McLay, L., & van der Meer, L. (2014). Comparing picture exchange, manual signs, and iPad-based SGDs as AAC options for children with autism. Paper presented at the 16th Biennial Conference of the International Society for Augmentative and Alternative Communication, Lisbon, Portugal: 19–26 July 2014.
14. Mirenda, P., & Iacono, T. (Eds.). (2009). Autism spectrum disorders and AAC. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Publishing.
15. NZSL Online (2013). Wellington, NZ: Victoria University; Available from: http://nzsl.vuw.ac.nz/signs/1897
16. Premack, D. (2004). Is language the key to human intelligence? Science, 303, 318–320.
17. Schlosser, R. W. (2003). Single-subject experimental designs. In R. W. Schlosser (Ed.), The efficacy of augmentative and alternative communication (pp. 85–145). Boston: Academic.
18. Schlosser, R. W., & Lee, D. (2003). Evidence-based strategies for promoting generalization and maintenance. In R. W. Schlosser (Ed.), The efficacy of augmentative and alternative communication: Toward evidence-based practice (pp. 533–552). Boston: Academic.
19. Sennott, S., & Bowker, A. (2009). Autism, AAC, and Proloquo2Go. Perspectives on Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 18, 137–145.
20. Sidman, M. (1960). Tactics of scientific research: Evaluating experimental data in psychology. New York: Basic Books.
21. Sigafoos, J., O’Reilly, M., Lancioni, G., & Sutherland, D. (2014). Augmentative and alternative communication for individuals with autism spectrum disorder and intellectual disability. Current Developmental Disorder Reports, 1, 51–57.
22. Singh, N. N., Lancioni, G. E., O’Reilly, M. F., Molina, E. J., Adkins, A. D., & Oliva, D. (2003). Self-determination during mealtimes through microswitch choice-making by an individual with complex multiple disabilities and profound mental retardation. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 5, 209–215.
23. Son, S.-H., Sigafoos, J., O’Reilly, M., & Lancioni, G. E. (2006). Comparing two types of augmentative and alternative communication systems for children with autism. Pediatric Rehabilitation, 9, 389–395. doi:10.1080/13638490500519984.
24. Soto, G., Belfiore, P. J., Schlosser, R., & Haynes, C. (1993). Teaching specific requests: a comparative analysis of skill acquisition and preference using two augmentative and alternative communication aids. Education and Training in Mental Retardation, 28, 169–178.
25. Sparrow, S., Cicchetti, D., & Balla, D. (2005). Vineland-II Adaptive Behavior Scales (2nd ed.). Minneapolis: Pearson.
26. Stokes, T. F., & Baer, D. M. (1977). An implicit technology of generalization. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 10, 349–367.
27. van der Meer, L., Sigafoos, J., O’Reilly, M., & Lanciono, G. (2011). Assessing preferences for AAC options in communication interventions for individuals with developmental disabilities: a review of the literature. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 32, 1422–1431.
28. van der Meer, L., Didden, R., Sutherland, D., O’Reilly, M., Lancioni, G., & Sigafoos, J. (2012a). Comparing three augmentative and alternative communication modes for children with developmental disabilities. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 24, 451–468.
29. van der Meer, L., Sutherland, D., O’Reilly, M., Lancioni, G., & Sigafoos, J. (2012b). A further comparison of manual signing, picture exchange, and speech-generating devices as communication modes for children with autism spectrum disorders. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 6, 1247–1257.