Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Acquisition, Preference, and Follow-up Data on the Use of Three AAC Options by Four Boys with Developmental Disability/Delay

  • ORIGINAL ARTICLE
  • Published:
Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We compared how quickly four boys with developmental disability/delay learned to use manual signing (MS), picture exchange (PE), and a speech-generating device (SGD) to request the continuation of toy play. Opportunities to choose to use MS, PE, and SGD were included to determine if the boys showed a preference for using one of these options. Follow-up sessions occurred at 12, 15, and 18 months post-intervention. With intervention, three of the four participants learned to use each option, but one child only learned to use PE. Trials to criterion across children ranged from 22 to 28 for the SGD, from 12 to 60 for PE, and from 21 to 64 trials for MS. For the three participants who reached criterion with each AAC system, maintenance results were best for PE and SGD. Preference assessments during follow-up showed that participants most often chose the SGD, indicating a preference for that option. The findings suggest there may be value in assessing a child’s preference for different AAC options as part of the post-intervention follow-up process.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Blischak, D. M., Lloyd, L. L., & Fuller, D. R. (1997). Terminology Issues. In L. L. Lloyd, D. R. Fuller, & H. H. Arvidson (Eds.), Augmentative and Alternative Communication: A handbook of principles and practices (pp. 38–42). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boesch, M. C., Wendt, O., Subramanian, A., & Hsu, N. (2013a). 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. doi:10.1016/j.rasd.2012.12.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boesch, M. C., Wendt, O., Subramanian, A., & Hsu, N. (2013b). Comparative efficacy of the Picture Exchange Communication System (PECS) versus a speech-generating device: effects on social-communicative skills and speech development. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 29, 197–209. doi:10.3109/07434618.2013.818059.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bondy, A. S., & Frost, L. (2009). The Picture Exchange Communication System: Clinical and research applications. In P. Mirenda & T. Iacono (Eds.), Autism spectrum disorders and AAC (pp. 279–302). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Couper, L., van der Meer, L., Schafer, M. C. M., McKenzie, E., McLay, L., O'Reilly, M. F., et al. (2014). Comparing acquisition of and preference for manual signs, picture exchange, and speech-generating devices in nine children with autism spectrum disorder. Developmental Neurorehabilitation. doi:10.3109/17518423.2013.870244.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Duker, P., Didden, R., & Sigafoos, J. (2004). One-to-one training: Instructional procedures with developmental disabilities. Austin: Pro-Ed.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flores, M., Musgrove, K., Renner, S., Hinton, V., Strozier, S., Franklin, S., et al. (2012). A comparison of communication using the Apple iPad and a picture-based system. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 28, 74–84. doi:10.3109/07434618.2011.644579.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ganz, J. B., Lashley, E., & Rispoli, M. J. (2010). Non-responsiveness to intervention: children with autism spectrum disorders who do not rapidly respond to communication interventions. Developmental Neurorehabilitation, 13, 399–407. doi:10.3109/17518423.2010.508298.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ganz, J., Rispoli, M., Mason, R. A., & Hong, E. R. (2013). Moderation of effects of AAC based on setting and types of aided AAC on outcome variables: An aggregate study of single-case research with individuals with ASD. Developmental Neurorehabilitation. doi:10.3109/17518423.2012.748097.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, V. A., Sigafoos, J., Didden, R., O’Reilly, M. F., Lancioni, G. E., Ollington, N., et al. (2008). Validity of a structured interview protocol for assessing children’s preferences. In P. Grotwell & Y. Burton (Eds.), Early childhood education: Issues and developments (pp. 87–103). New York: Nova.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iacono, T. A., & Duncum, J. E. (1995). Comparison of sign alone and in combination with an electronic communication device in early language intervention: case study. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 11, 249–254. doi:10.1080/07434619512331277389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iacono, T. A., Mirenda, P., & Beukelman, D. R. (1993). Comparison of unimodal and multimodal AAC techniques for children with intellectual disabilities. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 9, 83–94. doi:10.1080/07434619312331276471.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, S. S., & Cosby, J. (2012). Building blocks of a beginning communication system. In S. S. Johnston, J. Reichle, K. M. Feely, & E. A. Jones (Eds.), AAC strategies for individuals with moderate to severe disabilities (pp. 25–49). Baltimore: Paul H. Brooks Publishing Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kagohara, D. M., van der Meer, L., Achmadi, D., Green, V. A., O’Reilly, M. F., Mulloy, A., et al. (2010). Behavioral intervention promotes successful use of an iPod-based communication device by an adolescent with autism. Clinical Case Studies, 9, 328–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, C. H. (2005). Single-case designs for educaitonal research. Boston: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lang, R., Regester, A., Rispoli, M., Pimentel, S., & Camargo, H. (2010). Rehabilitation issues in autism spectrum disorders. Developmental Neurorehabilitation, 13, 153–155. doi:10.3109/17518421003607597.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Light, J., & Drager, K. (2007). AAC technologies for young children with complex communication needs: state of the science and future research directions. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 23, 204–216.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lorah, E. R., Tincany, 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. doi:10.1007/s10882-013-9337-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Makaton New Zealand/Aotearoa. (1998). Sign illustrations for Makaton core vocabulary New Zealand version. Auckland, New Zealand: Westprint.

  • Mayer-Johnson Co. (1994). Picture communication symbols combination book. Solano Beach: Mayer-Johnson Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mirenda, P. (2003). Toward functional augmentative and alternative communication for students with autism: Manual signs, graphical symbols, and voice output communication aids. Language, Speech & Hearing Services in Schools, 34, 203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ninci, J., Lang, R., Davenport, K., Lee, A., Garner, J., Moore, M., et al. (2013). An analysis of the generalization and maintenance of eye contact taught during play. Developmental Neurorehabilitation, 16, 301–307. doi:10.3109/17518423.2012.730557.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Reichle, J., York, J., & Sigafoos, J. (1991). Implementing augmentative and alternative communication: Strategies for learners with severe disabilities. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlosser, R. W. (2003). Single-subject experimental design. In R. W. Schlosser (Ed.), The efficacy of augmentative and alternative communication: Toward evidence-based practice. San Diego: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlosser, R. W., & Blischak, D. M. (2004). Effects of speech and print feedback on spelling by children with autism. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 47, 848–862. doi:10.4044/1092-4388(2004/063).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schlosser, R. W., Sigafoos, J., Rothschild, N., Burke, M., & Palace, L. M. (2007). Speech and language disorders. In I. Brown & M. Percy (Eds.), A comprehensive guide to intellectual and developmental disabilities (pp. 383–401). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sennot, S., & Bowker, A. (2009). Autism, AAC and Proloquo2Go. Perspectives on Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 18, 137–145. doi:10.1044/aac18.4.137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sigafoos, J. (1998). Choice making and personal selection strategies. In J. Luiselli & M. Cameron (Eds.), Antecedent control: Innovative approaches to behavioral support (pp. 187–221). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sigafoos, J. (2006). Self-determination: can we let the child determine the “best” treatment? Pediatric Rehabilitation, 9, 1–2. doi:10.1080/13638490500293341.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sigafoos, J., & Drasgow, E. (2001). Conditional use of aided and unaided AAC: a review and clinical case demonstration. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 16, 152–161. doi:10.1177/108835760101600303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sigafoos, J., & Mirenda, P. (2002). Selecting augmentative communication devices for persons with severe disabilities: Some factors for educational teams to consider. In J. Reichle, D. Beukelman, & J. Light (Eds.), Exemplary practices for beginning communicators. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sigafoos, J., Drasgow, E., & Schlosser, R. W. (2003). Strategies for beginning communicators. In R. W. Schlosser (Ed.), The efficacy of augmentative and alternative communication: Toward evidence-based practice (pp. 323–346). Boston: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sparrow, S. S., Cicchetti, D. V., & Balla, D. A. (2005). Vineland-II adaptive behavior scales (2nd ed.). Minneapolis: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stafford, A. M., Alberto, P. A., Fredrick, L. D., Heflin, L. J., & Heller, K. W. (2002). Preference variability and the instruction of choice making with students with severe intellectual disabilities. Education & Training in Mental Retardation & Developmental Disabilities, 37, 70–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sundberg, M. L. (1993). Selecting a response form for nonverbal persons: facilitated communication, pointing systems, or sign language? The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 11, 99–116.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tan, X.Y., Trembath, D., Bloomberg, K., Iacono, T., & Caithness, T. (2014). Acquisition and generalization of key word signing by three children with autism. Developmental Neurorehabilitation, 1–12. doi: 10.3109/17518423.2013.863236.

  • Tincani, M. (2004). Comparing the Picture Exchange Communication System and sign language training for children with autism. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 19, 152–163. doi:10.1177/10883576040190030301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van der Meer, L., & Rispoli, M. (2010). Communication interventions involving speech-generating devices for children with autism: a review of the literature. Developmental Neurorehabilitation, 13, 294–306. doi:10.3109/17518421003671494.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • van der Meer, L., Sigafoos, J., O’Reilly, M. F., & Lancioni, G. E. (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. doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2011.02.003.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • van der Meer, L., Didden, R., Sutherland, D., O’Reilly, M.F., Lancioni, G.E., & Sigafoos, J. (2012a). Comparing three augmentative and alternative communication modes for children with developmental disabilities. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 1–18. doi: 10.1007/s10882-012-9283-3

  • van der Meer, L., Kagohara, D., Achmadi, D., O’Reilly, M. F., Lancioni, G. E., Sutherland, D., et al. (2012b). Speech-generating devices versus manual signing for children with developmental disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 33, 1658–1669. doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2012.04.004.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • van der Meer, L., Sutherland, D., O’Reilly, M. F., Lancioni, G. E., & Sigafoos, J. (2012c). 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van der Meer, L., Kagohara, D., Roche, L., Sutherland, D., Balandin, S., Green, V. A., et al. (2013a). Teaching multi-step requesting and social communication to two children with autism spectrum disorders with three AAC options. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 29, 222–234. doi:10.3109/07434618.2013.815801.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • van der Meer, L., Sigafoos, J., Sutherland, D., McLay, L., Lang, R., Lancioni, G. E., Marschik, P.B. (2013b). Preference-enhanced communication intervention and development of social communicative functions in a child with autism spectrum disorder. Clinical Case Studies, 1–14. doi:10.1177/1534650113508221.

  • Wehmeyer, M. L. (1992). Self-determination and the education of students with mental retardation. Education & Training in Mental Retardation, 27, 302–314.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wehmeyer, M. L. (2002). Self-determination and the education of students with disabilities. ERIC Clearinghouse on Disabilities and Gifted Education. http://www.hoagiesgifted.org

  • Wehmeyer, M. L., Shogren, K. A., Zager, D., Smith, T. E. C., & Simpson, R. (2010). Research-based principles and practices for educating students with autism: self-determination and social interactions. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 45, 475–486.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements and Declaration of Interests

Support for this research was provided from the New Zealand Government through the Marsden Fund Council, administered by the Royal Society of New Zealand; and by Victoria University of Wellington, The University of Canterbury, and The New Zealand Institute of Language, Brain & Behaviour. The authors report no conflicts of interests. The authors alone are solely responsible for the content and writing of this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Educational Psychology, Victoria University of Wellington, PO Box 17-310, Karori, 6147, Wellington, New Zealand

    Donna Achmadi, Jeff Sigafoos, Larah van der Meer, Flaviu Hodis & Vanessa A. Green

  2. School of Health Sciences, College of Education, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand

    Dean Sutherland & Laurie McLay

  3. Department of Neuroscience and Sense Organs, University of Bari, Bari, Italy

    Giulio E. Lancioni

  4. Meadows Center for Preventing Educational Risk, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA

    Mark F. O’Reilly

  5. Institute of Physiology, iDN-Interdisciplinary Developmental Neuroscience, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria

    Peter B. Marschik

Authors
  1. Donna Achmadi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jeff Sigafoos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Larah van der Meer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Dean Sutherland
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Giulio E. Lancioni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Mark F. O’Reilly
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Flaviu Hodis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Vanessa A. Green
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Laurie McLay
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Peter B. Marschik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jeff Sigafoos.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Achmadi, D., Sigafoos, J., van der Meer, L. et al. Acquisition, Preference, and Follow-up Data on the Use of Three AAC Options by Four Boys with Developmental Disability/Delay. J Dev Phys Disabil 26, 565–583 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10882-014-9379-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10882-014-9379-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation