Effects of Communication Partner Instruction on the Communication of Individuals using AAC: A Meta-Analysis

References

• Amundsen, S. B. (2014). Augmentative and alternative communication access for individuals with communication disorders in medical settings (Unpublished master's thesis). University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL.
   Google Scholar
• Barker, M. R., Saunders, K. J., & Brady, N. C. (2012). Reading instruction for children who use AAC: Considerations in the pursuit of generalizable results. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 28, 160–70. doi:10.3109/07434618.2012.704523
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Ben Chaabane, D. B., Alber-Morgan, S. R., & DeBar, R. M. (2009). The effects of parent-implemented PECS training on improvisation of mands by children with autism. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 42, 671–671. doi:10.1901/jaba.2009.42-671.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beeson, P. M., & Robey, R. R. (2006). Evaluating single-subject treatment research: Lessons learned from the aphasia literature. Neuropsychology Review, 16, 161–169. doi:10.1007/s11065-006-9013-7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beukelman, D. R. & Mirenda, P. (2013). Augmentative and alternative communication: Supporting children and adults with complex communication needs (4th ed.). Baltimore, MD: Brookes Publishing Company.
   Google Scholar
• *Binger, C., Kent-Walsh, J., Berens, J., Del Campo, S., & Rivera, D. (2008). Teaching Latino parents to support the multi-symbol message productions of their children who require AAC. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 24, 323–338. doi:10.1080/07434610802130978
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Binger, C., Kent-Walsh, J., Ewing, C., & Taylor, S. (2010). Teaching educational assistants to facilitate the multi-symbol message productions of young students who require augmentative and alternative communication. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 19, 108–120. doi:10.1044/1058-0360
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Binger C., & Light J. (2006). Demographics of preschoolers who require AAC. Language, Speech and Hearing Services in the Schools, 37, 200–208.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Binger, C., Maguire-Marshall, M., & Kent-Walsh, J. (2011). Using aided AAC models and contrastive targets to teach grammatical morphemes to children who use AAC. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 54, 160–176. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2010/09-0163)
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Bingham, M. A., Spooner, F., & Browder, D. (2007). Training paraeducators to promote the use of augmentative and alternative communication by students with significant disabilities. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 42, 339–352.
   Google Scholar
• *Carter, M., & Maxwell, K. (1998). Promoting interaction with children using augmentative communication through a peer-directed intervention. International Journal of Disability, Development, and Education, 45, 75–96. doi:10.1080/1034912980450106
   Google Scholar
• *Chung, Y. C., & Carter, E. W. (2013). Promoting peer interactions in inclusive classrooms for students who use speech-generating devices. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 38, 94–109. doi:10.2511/027494813807714492
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chung, Y. C., Carter, E. W., & Sisco, L. G. (2012). Social interactions of students with disabilities who use augmentative and alternative communication in inclusive classrooms. American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 117, 349–367. doi:10.1352/1944-7558-117.5.349
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cooper, H., Hedges, L., & Valentine, J. (2009). The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Cumley, G., & Beukelman, D. (1992). Roles and responsibilities of facilitators in augmentative and alternative communication. Seminars in Speech and Language, 13, 111–119. doi:10.1055/s-2008-1064190
   Google Scholar
• *Dattilo, J., & Light, J. (1993). Setting the stage for leisure: Encouraging reciprocal communication for people using augmentative and alternative communication systems through facilitator instruction. Therapeutic Recreation Journal, 27, 156–171.
   Google Scholar
• Egger, M., & Smith, G. D. (1998). Bias in location and selection of studies. BMJ (Clinical Research Edition), 316, 61–66. doi:10.1136/bmj.316.7124.61
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Egger, M., Zellweger-Zähner, T., Schneider, M., Junker, C., Lengeler, C., & Antes, G. (1997). Language bias in randomised controlled trials published in English and German. Lancet, 350, 326–329. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(97)02419-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ganz, J. B., Earles-Vollrath, T. L., Heath, A. K., Parker, R. I., Rispoli, M. J., & Duran, J. B. (2012). A meta-analysis of single case research studies on aided augmentative and alternative communication systems with individuals with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 42, 60–74. doi:10.1007/s10803-011-1212-2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Garrison-Harrell, L., Kamps, D., & Kravits, T. (1997). The effects of peer networks on social-communicative behaviors for students with autism. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 12, 241–254. doi:10.1177/108835769701200406
   Google Scholar
• Hopper, T., Holland, A. & Rewega, M. (2002). Conversational coaching: Treatment outcomes and future directions. Aphasiology, 16, 745–761. doi: 10.1080/02687030244000059
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horner, R. H., Car, E. G., Halle, J., McGee, G., Odom, S., & Wolery, M. (2005). The use of single-subject research to identify evidence-based practice in special education. Exceptional Children, 71, 165–179. doi: 10.1177/001440290507100203
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Hunt, P., Alwell, M., & Goetz, L. (1991). Interacting with peers through conversation turn taking with a communication book adaptation. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 7, 117–126. doi:10.1080/07434619112331275783
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, J. M., Inglebret, E., Jones, C., & Ray, J. (2006). Perspectives of speech language pathologists regarding success versus abandonment of AAC. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 22, 85–99. doi:10.1080/07434610500483588
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Kent-Walsh, J. (2003). The effects of an educational assistant instructional program on the communicative turns of students who use augmentative and alternative communication during book reading activities. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA.
   Google Scholar
• *Kent-Walsh, J., Binger, C., & Hasham, Z. (2010). Effects of parent instruction on the symbolic communication of children using augmentative and alternative communication during storybook reading. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 19, 97–107. doi:10.1044/1058-0360(2010/09-0014)
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kent-Walsh, J., Binger, C., & Malani, M. D. (2010). Teaching partners to support the communication skills of young children who use AAC: Lessons from the ImPAACT program. Early Childhood Services, 4, 155–170.
   Google Scholar
• Kent-Walsh, J., & McNaughton, D. (2005). Communication partner instruction in AAC: Present practices and future directions. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 21, 195–204. doi:10.1080/07434610400006646
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kent-Walsh, J., Stark, C. & Binger, C. (2008). Tales from school trenches: AAC service delivery and professional expertise. Seminars in Speech and Language, 29, 146–154. doi: 10.1055/s-2008-1079128
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kratochwill, T. R., Hitchcock, J., Horner, R. H., Levin, J. R., Odom, S. L., Rindskopf, D. M., & Shadish, W. R. (2010). Single-case design technical documentation. Retrieved from the What Works Clearinghouse website: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/wwc_scd.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Light, J. (1999). Do augmentative and alternative communication interventions really make a difference?: The challenges of efficacy research. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 15, 13–24. doi:10.1080/07434619912331278535
   Google Scholar
• Light, J., Collier, B., & Parnes, P. (1985). Communicative interaction between young nonspeaking physically disabled children and their primary caregivers: Part I – Discourse patterns. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 1, 74–83. doi:10.1080/07434618512331273561
   Google Scholar
• Mirenda, P., Iacono, T., & Williams, R. (1990). Communication options for persons with severe and profound disabilities: State of the art and future directions. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 15, 3–21.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nunes, D. (2005). Enhancing the use of augmentative communication systems of children with autism through caregiver-implemented naturalistic teaching strategies (Doctoral Dissertation). Retrieved from Electronic Theses, Treatises, and Dissertation. (Accession Number 2498)
   Google Scholar
• *Nunes, D., & Hanline, M. F. (2007). Enhancing the alternative and augmentative communication use of a child with autism through a parent-implemented naturalistic intervention. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 54, 177–197. doi:10.1080/10349120701330495
   Google Scholar
• *Park, J. H., Alber-Morgan, S. R., & Cannella-Malone, H. (2010). Effects of mother-implemented Picture Exchange Communication System (PECS) training on independent communicative behaviors of young children with autism spectrum disorders. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 31, 37–47. doi:10.1177/0271121410393750
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parker, R. I., & Hagan-Burke, S. (2007). Useful effect size interpretations for single case research. Behavior Therapy, 38, 95–105. doi:10.1016/j.beth.2006.05.002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parker, R. I., Hagan-Burke, S., & Vannest, K. (2007). Percentage of all non-overlapping data (PAND): An alternative to PND. The Journal of Special Education, 40, 194–204. doi:10.1177/00224669070400040101
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parker, R. I., Vannest, K. J., & Davis, J. L. (2011). Effect size in single-case research: A review of nine nonoverlap techniques. Behavior Modification, 35, 303–322. doi:10.1177/0145445511399147
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parker, R. I., Vannest, K. J., & Brown, L. (2009). The improvement rate difference for single-case research. Exceptional Children, 75, 135–150. doi: 10.1177/001440290907500201
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reynhout, G. & Carter, M. (2011). Evaluation of the efficacy of Social Stories ™ using three single subject metrics. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 5, 885–900. doi:10.1016/j.rasd.2010.10.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robey, R. R. (2004). A five-phase model for clinical-outcome research. Journal of Communication Disorders, 37, 401–411. doi:10.1016/j.jcomdis.2004.04.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roche, L., Sigafoos, J., Lancioni, G. E., O’Reilly, M. F., Green, V. A., Sutherland, D., … Edrisinha, C. D. (2014). Tangible symbols as an AAC option for individuals with developmental disabilities: A systematic review of intervention studies. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 30, 28–39. doi:10.3109/07434618.2013.878958
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Romski, M., Sevcik, R. A., Adamson, L. B., Smith, A., & Barker, R. M. (2010). Randomized comparison of augmented and nonaugmented language interventions for toddlers with developmental delays and their parents. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research, 53, 350–365. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2009/08-0156)
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Rosa-Lugo, L., & Kent-Walsh, J. (2008). Effects of parent instruction on communicative turns of Latino children using augmentative and alternative communication during storybook reading. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 30, 49–61. doi:10.1177/1525740108320353.
   Google Scholar
• Schepis, M., & Reid, D. (2003). Issues affecting staff enhancement of speech-generating device use among people with severe cognitive disabilities. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 19, 59–65. doi:10.1080/0743461032000056469
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Schlosser, R. W., Balandin, S., Hemsley, B., Iacono, T., Probst, P., & von Tetzchner, S. (2014). Facilitated communication and authorship: A systematic review. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 30, 359–368. doi:10.3109/07434618.2014.971490
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schlosser, R. W., & Sigafoos, J. (2009). Navigating evidence-based information sources in augmentative and alternative communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 25, 225–235. doi:10.3109/07434610903360649
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schlosser, R. W., & Wendt, O. (2008). Effects of augmentative and alternative communication intervention on speech production in children with autism: A systematic review. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 17, 212–230. doi: 10.1044/1058-0360
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scruggs, T., Mastropieri, M. A., & Casto, G. (1987). The quantitative synthesis of single-subject research methodology and validation. Remedial and Special Education, 8, 24–33. doi: 10.1177/074193258700800206
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
   Google Scholar
• Simmons-Mackie, N. N. (2000). Social approaches to the management of aphasia. In L. E. Worrall & C. E. Frattali (Eds.), Neurogenic communication disorders: A functional approach (pp. 162–185). New York, NY: Thieme.
   Google Scholar
• Simmons-Mackie, N., Raymer, A., Armstrong, E., Holland, A., & Cherney, L.R. (2010). Communication partner training in aphasia: A systematic review. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 91, 1814–1837. doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2010.08.026
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soto, G. (1999). Understanding the impact of graphic sign use on the message structure. In L. L. Loncke, F. T. Clibbens, J. Arvidson, & H. H. Lloyd (Eds.), Augmentative and alternative communication: New directions in research and practice (pp. 40–48). London, UK: Whurr Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• *Stiebel, D. (1999). Promoting augmentative communication during daily routines: A parent problem-solving intervention. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 1, 159–169. doi:10.1177/109830079900100304
   Google Scholar
• *Trottier, N., Kamp, L., & Mirenda, P. (2011). Effects of peer-mediated instruction to teach use of speech-generating devices to students with autism in social game routines. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 27, 26–39. doi:10.3109/07434618.2010.546810
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vannest, K., Parker, R. I., & Gonen, O. (2011). Single case research: Web based calculators for SCR analysis (Version 1.0) [Web-based application]. College Station, TX: Texas A & M University. Retrieved from singlecaseresearch.org.
   Google Scholar
• Ventry, I., & Schiavetti, N. (1986). Evaluating research in speech pathology and audiology (2nd ed.). New York: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Walker, V. L., & Snell, M. E. (2013). Effects of augmentative and alternative communication on challenging behavior: A meta-analysis. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 29, 117–131. doi:10.3109/07434618.2013.785020
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Westover, J. M. (2010). Increasing the literacy skills of students who require AAC through modified direct instruction and specific instructional feedback (Doctoral Dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses. (Order Number 3420436)
   Google Scholar
• White, D., Rusch, F., Kazdin, A., & Hartmann, D. (1989). Applications of meta analysis in individual-subject research. Behavior Assessment, 11, 281–296.
   Google Scholar