Expressive and receptive use of speech and graphic symbols by typically developing children: What skills contribute to performance on structured sentence-level tasks?

References

• Baddeley, A.D. (2003). Working memory and language: An overview. Journal of Communication Disorders, 36, 189–208. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-9924(03)00019-4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berk, L. (2011). Exploring lifespan development (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
   Google Scholar
• Binger, C., Maguire-Marshall, M., & Kent-Walsh, J. (2011). Using aided AAC models, recasts, and contrastive targets to teach grammatical morphemes to children with developmental delays who use AAC. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 54, 160–176. doi:https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2010/09-0163)
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bishop, D. (2003). Test for reception of grammar (TROG). Oxford, UK: PsychCorp.
   Google Scholar
• Boyer, C., Trudeau, N., & Sutton, A. (2012). Performance of children with typical development when reading and interpreting graphic-symbol sequences. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 28, 96–105. doi:https://doi.org/10.3109/07434618.2014.940465
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Callaghan, T. (2013). Symbols and symbolic thought. In P. Zelazo (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of developmental psychology: Volume. 1. body and mind (pp. 874–1005). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Callaghan, T., & Corbit, J. (2015). The development of symbolic representation. In L. Liben & U. Müller (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology and developmental science: Volume 2. cognitive processes (pp. 250–295).
   Google Scholar
• Clarke, M. (2016). Co-construction, asymmetry and multimodality in children’s conversations. In M. Smith & J. Murray (Eds.), The silent partner? Language, interaction and aided communication (pp. 177–198). Surrey, UK: J&R Press.
   Google Scholar
• Clendon, S., & Anderson, K. (2016). Syntax and morphology in aided language development. In M. Smith & J. Murray (Eds.), The silent partner? Language, interaction and aided communication (pp. 119–140). Surrey, UK: J&R Press.
   Google Scholar
• Drager, K.D.R., Light, J.C., Speltz, J.C., Fallon, K.A., & Jeffries, L.Z. (2003). The performance of typically developing 2 1/2-year-olds on dynamic display AAC technologies with different system layouts and language organizations. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 46, 298–312.). doi:https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2003/024)
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dunn, L.M., & Dunn, K. (1997). Peabody picture vocabulary test (4th ed.). Toronto, Canada: Pearson Assessment/PsychCorp.
   Google Scholar
• Dunn, L.M., Dunn, D.M., & Theriault-Whalen, C. (1993). Échelle de vocabulaire en images Peabody (ÉVIP). Toronto, Canada: Pearson.
   Google Scholar
• Gardner, M. (2000). Cognitive (Intelligence) Test: Nonverbal. Wood Dale, IL: Stoelting.
   Google Scholar
• Higginbotham, J.D., & Wilkins, D.P. (1999). Slipping through the timestream: Social issues of time and timing in augmented interactions. In D. Kovarsky, J. Duchan, & M. Maxwell, (Eds.), Constructing (in)competence: Disabling evaluations in clinical and social interaction. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, R.L. (1994). The picture communication symbols. Solana Beach, CA: Mayer Johnson.
   Google Scholar
• Lecocq, P. (1996). Épreuve de compréhension syntaxico-sémantique (ÉCOSSE). Villeneuve d’Ascq, France: Presses Université de Septentrion.
   Google Scholar
• Light, J. (1989). Toward a definition of communicative competence for individuals using augmentative and alternative communication systems. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 5, 137–144. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/07434618912331275126
   Google Scholar
• Murray, J., Bell, H., & Goldbart, J. (2016). Operational demands and representational forms. In M. Smith & J. Murray (Eds.), The silent partner? Language, interaction and aided communication (pp. 35–64). Surrey, UK: J&R Press.
   Google Scholar
• Murray, J., & Goldbart, J. (2009). Cognitive and language acquisition in typical and aided language learning: A review of recent evidence from an aided communication perspective. Child Language Teaching and Therapy, 25, 31–34. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0265659008098660
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murray, J., & Goldbart, J. (2011). Emergence of working memory in children using aided communication. Journal of Assistive Technologies, 5, 214–232. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/17549451111190623
   Google Scholar
• Roid, G., & Miller, L. (1997). Leiter International Performance Scale-Revised (Leiter-R). Wood Dale, IL: Stoelting.
   Google Scholar
• Romski, M.A., & Sevcik, R.A. (1993). Language comprehension: Considerations for augmentative and alternative communication. AAC: Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 9, 281–285. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/07434619312331276701
   Google Scholar
• Smith, M. (1996). The medium or the message: A study of speaking children using communication boards. In S. von Tetzchner & M.H. Jenson (Eds.), Augmentative and alternative communication: European perspectives (pp. 119–136). San Diego, CA: Singular Publishing Group.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, M. (2015). Language development of individuals who require aided communication: Reflections on state of the science and future research directions. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 31, 215–233. doi:https://doi.org/10.3109/07434618.2015.1062553
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, M., & Grove, N.C. (2003). Output for individuals who use AAC. In J. Light, D. Beukelman, & J. Reichle (Eds.), Communicative competence for people who use AAC: From research to effective practice (pp. 163–198). Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, M.M. (2018). Constructing and navigating cultural borderlands using augmentative and alternative communication. Topics in Language Disorders, 38, 96–107. doi:https://doi.org/10.1097/TLD.0000000000000148
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sutton, A. (2016). Symbolic representation and graphic symbol use: Insights from typical development. In M. Smith & J. Murray (Eds.), The silent partner? Language, interaction and aided communication (pp. 65–118). Surrey, UK: J&R Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sutton, A., Gallagher, T., Morford, J.P., & Shahnaz, N. (2000). Relative clause sentence production using augmentative and alternative communication systems. Applied Psycholinguistics, 21, 473–486. doi:https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716400004033
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sutton, A., Soto, G., & Blockberger, S. (2002). Grammatical issues in graphic symbol communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 18, 192–204. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/07434610212331281271
   Google Scholar
• Sutton, A., Trudeau, N., Morford, J., Rios, M., & Poirier, M.-A. (2010). Young children have difficulty constructing and interpreting simple utterances composed of graphic symbols. Journal of Child Language, 37, 1–26. doi:https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305000909009477
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thistle, J.J., & Wilkinson, K. (2017). Effects of background color and symbol arrangement cues on construction of multi-symbol messages by young children without disabilities: Implications for aided AAC design. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 33, 160–169. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/07434618.2017.1336571
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trudeau, N., Morford, J. P., & Sutton, A. (2010). The role of word order in the interpretation of canonical and non-canonical graphic symbol utterances: A developmental study. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 26, 108–121. doi:https://doi.org/10.3109/07434618.2010.481563
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trudeau, N., Sutton, A., Dagenais, E., de Broeck, S., & Morford, J.P. (2007). Construction of graphic symbol utterances by children, teenagers, and adults: The impact of structure and task demands. Journal of Speech, Language & Hearing Research, 50, 1314–1329.(2007/092). doi:https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2007/092)
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trudeau, N., Sutton, A., & Morford, J.P. (2014). An investigation of developmental changes in interpretation and construction of graphic symbol sequences through systematic combination of input and output modalities. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 30, 187–199. doi:https://doi.org/10.3109/07434618.2014.940465
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• von Tetzchner, S. (2015). The semiotics of aided language development. Cognitive Development, 36, 180–190. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogdev.2015.09.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• von Tetzchner, S. (2018). Introduction to the special issue on aided language processes, development, and use: An international perspective. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 34, 1–15. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/07434618.2017.1422020
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• von Tetzchner, S., & Basil, C. (2011). Terminology and notation in written representations of conversations with augmentative and alternative communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 27, 141–149. doi:https://doi.org/10.3109/07434618.2011.610356
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wagner, B., & Jackson, H. (2006). Developmental memory capacity resources of typical children retrieving picture communication symbols using direct selection and visual linear scanning with fixed communication displays. Journal of Speech, Language, Hearing Research, 49, 113–126.) doi:https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2006/009)
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilkinson, K., & Jagaroo, V. (2004). Contributions of principles of visual cognitive science to AAC system display design. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 20, 123–136. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/07434610410001699717
   Google Scholar