924
Views
18
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Research Note

Qualitative Analysis of Decision Making by Speech-Language Pathologists in the Design of Aided Visual Displays

&
Pages 136-147 | Published online: 25 May 2010

References

  • Bailey, B. R., Downing, J. (1994). Using visual accents to enhance attending to communication symbols for students with severe disabilities. Re:View, 26(3), 101–119.
  • Beukelman, D. R., Jones, R. S., Rowan, M. (1989). Frequency of word use by nondisabled peers in integrated preschool classrooms. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 5, 243–248.
  • Beukelman, D. R., Mirenda, P. (2005). Augmentative and alternative communication: Supporting children and adults with complex communication needs (3rd ed.). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
  • Binger, C., Light, J. (2007). The effect of aided AAC modeling on the expression of multi-symbol messages by preschoolers who use AAC. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 23, 30–43.
  • Bloomburg, K., Karlan, G., Lloyd, L. (1990). The comparative translucency of initial lexical items represented by five graphic symbols and sets. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 33, 717–725.
  • Drager, K. D., 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, Hearing Research, 46, 298–312.
  • Drager, K. D., Postal, V. J., Carrolus, L., Castellano, M., Gagliano, C., Glynn, J. (2006). The effect of aided language modeling on symbol comprehension and production in two preschoolers with autism. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 15, 112–125.
  • Fallon, K., Light, J., Achenbach, A. (2003). Semantic organization patterns of young children: Implications for AAC. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 19, 74–85.
  • Fried-Oken, M., More, L. (1992). An initial vocabulary for nonspeaking preschool children based on developmental and environmental language scores. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 8, 41–56.
  • 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.
  • Gibbons, F. X., Sawin, L. G., Gibbons, B. N. (1979). Evaluations of mentally retarded persons: Sympathy or patronization? American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 84, 124–131.
  • Goossens', C. (1989). Aided communication intervention before assessment: A case study of a child with cerebral palsy. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 5, 14–26.
  • Graves, J. (2000). Vocabulary needs in AAC: A sample of conversations topics between staff providing services to adults with learning difficulties and their service users. British Journal of Learning Disabilities, 28, 113–119.
  • Hannah, M. E., Midlarsky, E. (1987). Differential impact of labels and behavioral descriptions on attitudes toward people with disabilities. Rehabilitation Psychology, 32, 227–238.
  • Harris, M. D., Reichle, J. (2004). The impact of aided language stimulation on symbol comprehension and production in children with moderate cognitive disabilities. American Journal of Speech Language Pathology, 13, 155–167.
  • Jaffe, J. (1966). Attitudes of adolescents toward the mentally retarded. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 70, 907–912.
  • Johnson, J., Inglebret, E., Jones, C., Ray, J. (2006). Perspectives of speech language pathologists regarding success versus abandonment of AAC. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 22, 2, 85–99.
  • Karnilowicz, W., Sparrow, W. A., Shinkfield, A. J. (1994). High school students' attitudes toward performing social behaviors with mentally retarded and physically disabled peers. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 9, 65–80.
  • King, J., Spoeneman, T., Stuart, S. (1995). Small talk in adult conversations: Implications for AAC vocabulary selection. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 11, 260–264.
  • 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.
  • Light, J., Drager, K. D., Nemser, J. G. (2004). Enhancing the appeal of AAC technologies for young children: Lessons from the toy manufacturers. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 20, 137–149.
  • Light, J. C., Drager, K. D., McCarthy, J., Mellot, S., Millar, D., Parrish, C., et al (2004). Performance of typically developing four and five-year old children with AAC systems using different language organization techniques. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 20, 63–88.
  • Light, J., Page, R., Curran, J., Pitkin, L. (2007). Children's ideas for the design of AAC assistive technologies for young children with complex communication needs. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 23, 4, 274–287.
  • Light, J., Wilkinson, K. M., Drager, K. (under review). Designing effective aided Augmentative and Alternative Communication systems: Research evidence and implications for practice. Under review.
  • Maykut, P., Morehouse, R. (1994) Beginning qualitative research: A philosophical and practical guide. Washington, DC: The Falmer Press.
  • McCarthy, J., Light, J., Drager, K., McNaughton, D., Grodzicki, L., Jones, J., Panek, E., Parkin, E. (2006). Re-designing scanning to reduce learning demands: The performance of typically developing 2-year-olds. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 22, 269–283.
  • McNaughton, D., Light, J. (1989). Teaching facilitators to support the communication skills of an adult with severe cognitive disabilities: A case study. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 5, 35–41.
  • Mirenda, P., Locke, P. (1989). A comparison of symbol transparency in nonspeaking persons with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 54, 131–140.
  • Mizuko, M., Reichle, J. (1989). Transparency and recall of symbols among intellectually handicapped adults. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 54, 627–633.
  • Reichle, J., Dettling, E., Drager, K., Leiter, A. (2000). Comparison of correct responses and response latency for fixed and dynamic displays: Performance of a learner with severe developmental disabilities. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 16, 154–163.
  • Romski, M. A., Sevcik, R. A. (1996). Breaking the speech barrier: Language development through augmented means. Baltimore: Brookes.
  • Romski, M. A., Sevcik, R. A. (2003). Augmented input: Enhancing communication development. In J. C. Light, D. R. Beukelman, J. Reichle (Eds.), Communicative competence for individuals who use AAC: From research to effective practice. ( pp. 147–162). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brooks.
  • Rivard, L. M., Missiuna, C., Hanna, S., Wishart, L. (2007). Understanding teachers' perceptions of the motor difficulties of children with developmental motor coordination disorders. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 633–648.
  • Stephenson, J. (2007). The effect of color on the recognition and use of line drawings by children with severe intellectual disabilities. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 23(1), 44–55.
  • Thistle, J., Wilkinson, K. M. (2009). The effects of color cues on typically developing preschoolers' speed of locating a target line drawing: implications for augmentative and alternative communication display design. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 18(3), 231–240.
  • Wilkinson, K. M., Carlin, M., Thistle, J. (2008). The role of color cues in facilitating accurate and rapid location of aided symbols by children with and without Down syndrome. American Journal of Speech Language Pathology, 17, 179–193.
  • Wilkinson, K., Jagaroo, V. (2004). Contributions of principles of visual cognitive science to AAC system display design. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 20(3), 123–136.
  • Wilkinson, K. M., Rosenquist, C. (2006). Demonstration of a method for assessing semantic organization and category membership in individuals with autism spectrum disorders and receptive vocabulary limitations. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 22, 242–257.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.