Language Development of Individuals Who Require Aided Communication: Reflections on State of the Science and Future Research Directions

References

• Adamson, L. B., & Dunbar, B. (1991). Communication development of young children with tracheostomies. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 7, 275–283.
   Google Scholar
• Adamson, L. B., Romski, M., Bakeman, R., & Sevcik, R. A. (2010). Augmented language intervention and the emergence of symbol-infused joint engagement. Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research, 53, 1769–1773.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ahktar, N. (1999). Acquiring basic word order: Evidence for data-driven learning of syntatic structure. Journal of Child Language, 26, 339–356.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ahktar, N. (2005). The robustness of learning through overhearing. Developmental Science, 8, 199–209.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alant, E., Zheng, W., Harty, M., & Lloyd, L. (2013). Translucency ratings of Blissymbls over repeated exposures by children with autism. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 29, 272–283.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balandin, S., & Iacono, T. (1998). A few well-chosen words. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 14, 147–161.
   Google Scholar
• Barton, A., Sevcik, R. A., & Romski, M. (2006). Exploring visual-graphic symbol acquisition by pre-school age children with developmental and language delays. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 22, 10–20.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Basil, C. (1992). Social interaction and learned helplessness in severely disabled children. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 8, 188–199.
   Google Scholar
• Bedrosian, J. (1997). Language acquisition in young AAC system users: Issues and directions for future research. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 13, 179–185.
   Google Scholar
• Benigno, J., Bennett, J., McCarthy, J., & Smith, J. L. (2011). Situational and psychosocial factors mediating coordinated joint attention with augmentative and alternative communication systems with beginning communicators without disabilities. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 27, 67–76. doi: 10.3109/07434618.2012.654191
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berko-Gleason, J. (1975). Fathers and other strangers: Men's speech to young children. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Berninger, V., & Gans, B. (1986). Language profiles in nonspeaking individuals of normal intelligence with severe cerebral palsy. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 2, 45–50.
   Google Scholar
• Binger, C., Berens, J., Kent-Walsh, J., & Taylor, S. (2008). The effects of aided AAC interventions on AAC use, speech, and symbolic gestures. Seminars in Speech and Language, 29, 101–111. doi: 10.1055/s-2008-1079124
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Binger, C., Kent-Walsh, J., Ewing, C., & Taylor, S. (2010). Teaching educational assistants to facilitate the multisymbol message productions of young students who require augmentative and alternative communication. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 19, 108–120.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Binger, C., & Light, J. (2008). The morphology and syntax of individuals who use AAC: research review and implications for effective practice. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 24, 123–138. doi: 790496493 [pii] 10.1080/07434610701830587
   PubMed Web of Science ®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 who use AAC. Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research, 54, 160–176.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blischak, D., & Lloyd, L. (1996). Multimodal augmentative and alternative communication : Case study. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 12, 37–46.
   Google Scholar
• Bloch, S., & Wilkinson, R. (2004). The understandability of AAC: A conversation analysis study of acquired dysarthria. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 20, 272–282.
   Google Scholar
• Blockberger, S., & Johnston, J. (2003). Grammatical morphology acquisition by children with complex communication needs. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 19, 207–221.
   Google Scholar
• Bloom, L. (1993). The transition from infancy to language. Cambridge.: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bloom, L., & Lahey, M. (1978). Language development and language disorders. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Bloom, P. (2000). How children learn the meanings of words. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bohm, L. A., Nelson, M. E., Driver, L. E., & Green, G. E. (2010). Babbling, vegetative function and language development after cricotracheal resection in aphonic children. Laryngoscope, 120, 2494–2497.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brady, N., Thiemann-Bourque, K., Fleming, K., & Matthews, K. (2013). Predicting language outcomes for children learning augmentative and alternative communication: Child and environmental factors. Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research, 56, 1569–1612. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2013/12-0102)
   Google Scholar
• Broberg, M., Ferm, U., & Thunberg, G. (2012). Measuring responsive style in parents who use AAC with their children: Development and evaluation of a new instrument. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 28, 243–253.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown, R. (1976). A first language: The early stages. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bruno, J., & Trembath, D. (2006). Use of aided language stimulation to improve syntactic performance during a weeklong intervention program. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 22, 300–313.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Calculator, S., N. (1997). Fostering early language acquisition and AAC use: Exploring reciprocal influences between children and their environments. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 13, 149–157.
   Google Scholar
• Callaghan, T. C. (2000). Factors affecting chidren's graphic symbol use in the third year: Language, similarity and iconicity. Cognitive Development, 15, 185–214.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Callaghan, T. C., & Rankin, M. (2002). Emergence of graphic symbol functioning and the question of domain specificity: A longitudinal training study. Child Development, 73, 359–376.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carter, M., & Iacono, T. A. (2002). Professional judgments of the intentionality of communicative acts. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 18, 177–186.
   Google Scholar
• Chomsky, N. (1986). Knowledge of language: Its nature, origins and use. London: Praeger Press.
   Google Scholar
• Clark, E. (2003). Early words. In E. Clark (Ed.), First language acquisition (pp. 79–92). Cambridge MA: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Clarke, M., Bloch, S., & Wilkinson, R. (2013). Speaker transfer in children's peer conversation: Completing communication-aid-mediated contributions. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 20, 37–53. doi: 10.3109/07434618.2013.767490
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clarke, M., & Kirton, A. (2003). Patterns of interaction between children with physical disabilities using augmentative and alternative communication and their peers. Child Language Teaching and Therapy, 19, 135–151.
   Google Scholar
• Clarke, M., McConachie, H., Price, K., & Wood, P. (2001). Views of young people using augmentative and alternative communication systems. International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders, 36, 107–115.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clarke, M., & Wilkinson, R. (2007). Interaction between children with cerebral palsy and their peers 1: Organizing and understanding VOCA use. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 23, 336–348.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clarke, M., & Wilkinson, R. (2008). Interaction between children with cerebral palsy and their peers 2: Understanding initiated VOCA-mediated turns. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 24, 3–15.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collins, S. (1996). Referring expressions in conversations between aided and natural speakers. In S. von Tetzchner & M. Jensen (Eds.), Augmentative and Alternative Communication: European perspectives. (pp. 89–100). London: Whurr.
   Google Scholar
• Communication Matters, ISAAC-UK. (2012). Single case study template. Fromhttp://www.communicationmatters.org.uk/page/single-case-study-template
   Google Scholar
• Dada, S., & Alant, E. (2009). The effect of aided language stimulation on vocabulary acquisition in children with little or no functional speech. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 18, 50–64.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dada, S., Huguet, A., & Bornman, J. (2013). The iconicity of Picture Communication Symbols for children with English additional language and mild intellectual disability. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 29, 360–373.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dahlgren-Sandberg, A., & Hjelmquist, E. (1996). Phonologic awareness and literacy abilities in nonspeaking preschool children with cerebral palsy. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 12, 138–154.
   Google Scholar
• Dahlgren-Sandberg, A., & Liliedahl, M. (2008). Patterns in early interaction between young preschool children with severe speech and physical impairments and their parents. Child Language Teaching and Therapy, 24, 9–30. doi: 10.1177/0265659007083566
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Loache, J. (2000). Dual representation and young children's use of scale models. Child Development, 71, 329–338.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeVeney, S., Hoffman, L., & Cress, C. (2012). Communication-based assessment of developmental age for young children with developmental disabilities. Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research, 55, 695–707. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2011/10-0148)
   Google Scholar
• Dodd, J. L., & Gorey, M. (2014). AAC intervention as an immersion model. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 35, 103–107. doi: 10.1177/1525740113504242
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drager, K. D., Postal, V., 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.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drager, K. D., Reichle, J., & Pinkoski, C. (2010). Synthesized speech output and children: A scoping review. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 19, 259–273. doi: 10.1044/1058-0360(2010/09-0024)
   Google Scholar
• Fey, M. E., Cleave, P. L., Long, S. H., & Hughes, D. L. (1993). Two approaches to the facilitation of grammar in children with language impairment: An experimental evaluation. Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research, 36, 141–157.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fujisawa, K., Inoue, T., Yamana, Y., & Hayashi, H. (2011). The effect of animation on learning action symbols by individuals with intellectual disabilities. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 27, 53–60. doi: 10.3109/07434618.2011.553245
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ganea, P., Allen, M., Butler, L., Carey, S., & de Loache, J. (2009). Toddlers’ referential understanding of pictures. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 104, 283–295. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2009.05.008
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geraghty, K., Waxman, S. R., & Gelman, S. A. (2014). Learning words from pictures: 15- and 17-month-old infants appreciate the referential and symbolic links among words, pictures and objects. Cognitive Development, 32, 1–11.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gerber, S., & Kraat, A. (1992). Use of a developmental model of language acquisition: Applications to children using AAC systems. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 8, 19–32.
   Google Scholar
• Geytenbeek, J., Mokkink, L., Knol, D., Vermeulen, R., & Oostrom, K. (2014). Reliability and validity of the C-BiLLT: A new instrument to assess comprehension of spoken language in young chidren with cerebral palsy and complex communication needs. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 30, 252–266. doi: 10.3109/07434618.2014.924992
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldbart, J., & Marshall, J. (2004). “Pushes and pulls” on the parents of children who use AAC. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 20, 194–200.
   Google Scholar
• Goldwin-Meadow, S. (2014). In search of resilient and fragile properties of language. Journal of Child Language, 41 (Suppl. S1), 64–77. doi: 10.1017/S030500091400021X
   Google Scholar
• Goossens, C., & Crain, S. (1988). Augmentative Communication: Intervention Resource. Wauconda, IL: Don Johnston Developmental Equipment.
   Google Scholar
• Harris, L., Skarakis-Doyle, E., & Haaf, R. (1996). Language treatment approach for users of AAC: Experimental single-subject investigation. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 12, 230–243.
   Google Scholar
• Heim, M., & Baker-Mills, A. (1996). Early development of symbolic communication and linguistic complexity through augmentative and alternative communication. In S. von Tetzchner & M. Jensen (Eds.), Augmentative and alternative communication: European perspectives (pp. 232–248). London: Whurr.
   Google Scholar
• Hjelmquist, E. (1999). Form and meaning in alternative language development. In L. Filip, Clibbens John, H. Arvidson, & L. Lloyd (Eds.), Augmentative and alternative communication: New directions in research and practice. (pp. 31–39). London: Whurr.
   Google Scholar
• Hjelmquist, E., Dahlgren-Sandberg, A., & Hedelin, L. (1994). Linguistics, AAC and metalinguistics in communicatively handicapped adolescents. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 10, 169–183.
   Google Scholar
• Hockema, S. A., & Smith, L. B. (2009). Learning your language, outside-in and inside-out. Linguistics, 47, 453–479. doi: 10.1515/LING.2009.016
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hohenberger, A., & Peltzer-Karpf, A. (2009). Language learning from the perspective of nonlinear dynamic systems. Linguistics, 47, 481–511. doi: 10.1515/LING.2009.017
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hornmeyer, I., & Renner, G. (2013). Confirming and denying in co-construction processes: A case study of an adult with cerebral palsy and two familiar partners. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 29, 259–271. doi: 10.3109/07434618.2013.813968
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hunt-Berg, M. (2005). The Bridge School: Educational inclusion outcomes over 15 years. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 21, 116–131.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iacono, T. A. (1992). Individual language learning styles and augmentative and alternative communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 8, 33–40.
   Google Scholar
• Iacono, T. A., Lyon, K., Johnson, H., & West, D. (2013). Experiences of adults with complex communication needs receiving and using low tech AAC: An Australian context. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 8, 392–401.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ingram, D. (1989). First language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Karmiloff-Smith, A. (1992). Beyond modularity: A developmental perspective on cognitive development. Cambridge, MA.: MIT Press (Bradford Books).
   Google Scholar
• Kelford-Smith, A., Thurston, S., Light, J., Parnes, P., & O’Keefe, B. (1989). The form and use of written communication produced by physically disabled individuals using microcomputers. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 5, 115–124.
   Google Scholar
• Kent-Walsh, J., Binger, C., & Hasham, Z. (2010). Effects of parent instruction on the symbol 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)
   Google Scholar
• Kent-Walsh, J., & McNaughton, D. (2005). Comunication partner instruction in AAC: Present practices and future directions. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 21, 195–200.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King, M., Binger, C. & Kent-Walsh, J. (2015). Using dynamic assessment to evaluate the expressive syntax of children who use augmentative and alternative communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 31, 1–14. doi: 10.3109/07434618.2014.995779
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Larsson, M., & Dahlgren-Sandberg, A. (2008). Memory ability of children with complex communication needs. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 24, 139–148.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Light, J. (1988). Interaction involving individuals using augmentative and alternative communication: State of the art and future directions. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 4, 66–82.
   Google Scholar
• Light, J. (Ed.) (1992). Language considerations and Augmentative and Alternative Communication [Special Issue]. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 8(1).
   Google Scholar
• Light, J. (1997). “Let's go star fishing”: Reflections on the contexts of language learning for children who use aided AAC. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 13, 158–171.
   Google Scholar
• Light, J., Collier, B., & Parnes, P. (1985a). Communicative interaction between young nonspeaking physically disabled children and their primary caregivers: Discourse patterns. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 1, 74–83.
   Google Scholar
• Light, J., Collier, B., & Parnes, P. (1985b). Communication interaction between young nonspeaking physically disabled children and their primary caregivers: Part II – Communication function. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 1, 98–107.
   Google Scholar
• Light, J., Collier, B., & Parnes, P. (1985c). Communicative interaction between young nonspeaking physically disabled children and their primary caregivers: Part III – Modes of communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 1, 125–133.
   Google Scholar
• Light, J., Drager, K. D., & Nemser, J. (2004). Enhancing the appeal of AAC technologies for young children: Lessons from the toy manufacturers. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 20, 137–149.
   Google Scholar
• Light, J., & Lindsay, P. (1991). Cognitive science and augmentative and alternative communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 7, 186–203.
   Google Scholar
• Light, J., & McNaughton, D. (2014). Communicative competence for individuals who require augmentative and alternative communication: A new definition for a new era of communication? Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 30, 1–18.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindner, K., & Hohenberger, A. (2009). Introduction: Concepts of development, learning, and acquisition. Linguistics, 47, 211–239. doi: 10.1515/LING.2009.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loncke, F., VanderBeken, K., & Lloyd, L. (1997). Toward a theoretical model of symbol processing and use. In E. Björck-Akesson & P. Lindsay (Eds.), Communicating naturally: Theoretical and methodological issues in augmentative and alternative communication (pp. 102–112). Västeras, Sweden: Mälardalen University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lund, S., & Light, J. (2003). The effectiveness of grammar instruction for individuals who use augmentative and alternative communication systems: A preliminary study. Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research, 46, 1110–1123.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lund, S., & Light, J. (2006). Long-term outcomes for individuals who use augmentative and alternative communication: Part I – What is a “good” outcome? Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 22, 284–299.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lund, S., & Light, J. (2007a). Long-term outcomes for individuals who use Augmentative and Alternative Communication: Part II – Communication interaction. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 23, 1–15.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lund, S., & Light, J. (2007b). Long-term outcomes for individuals who use Augmentative and Alternative Communication: Part III – Contributing factors. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 23, 323–335.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marvin, C., Beukelman, D. R., Brockhaus, J., & Kast, L. (1994). “What are you talking about?”: Semantic analysis of preschool children's conversational topics in home and preschool settings. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 10, 87–95.
   Google Scholar
• McCall, F., Marková, I., Murphy, J., Moodie, E., & Collins, S. (1997). Perspectives on AAC systems by the users and by their communication partners. European Journal of Disorders of Communication, 32, 235–256.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• McCord, M. S., & Soto, G. (2004). Perceptions of AAC: An ethnographic investigation of Mexican-American families. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 20, 209–227.
   Google Scholar
• Mizuko, M. I. (1987). Transparency and ease of learning symbols represented by Blissymbols, PCS, and Picsyms. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 3, 129–136.
   Google Scholar
• Moyle, J., Stokes, S., & Klee, T. (2011). Early language delay and specific language impairment. Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews, 17, 160–169. doi: 10.1002/ddrr.1110
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Müller, E., & Soto, G. (2002). Conversation patterns of three adults using aided communication: Variations across partners. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 18, 77–90.
   Google Scholar
• Murphy, J. (2004). “I prefer contact this close”: Perceptions of AAC by people with Motor Neurone Disease and their communication partners. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 20, 259–271.
   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, 7–34.
   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: 10.1108/17549451111190623
   Google Scholar
• Nagy, W. E., & Anderson, R. C. (1984). How many words are there in printed school English? Reading Research Quarterly, 19, 304–330.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nagy, W. E., Berninger, V., & Abbott, R. (2006). Contributions of morphology beyond phonology to literacy outcomes of upper elementary and middle-school students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 134–147.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nagy, W. E., & Scott, J. (2000). Vocabulary processes. In M. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research .(Vol. 3, pp. 269–284). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Nakamura, K., Newell, A., Alm, N., & Waller, A. (1998). How do members of different languag ecommunities compose sentences with a picture-based communication system? A cross-cultural study of picture-based sentences constructed by English and Japanese speakers . Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 14, 71–80.
   Google Scholar
• Nelson, N. (1992). Performance is the prize: Language competence and performance among AAC users. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 8, 3–18.
   Google Scholar
• Nigam, R., Schlosser, R., & Lloyd, L. (2006). Concomitant use of the matrix strategy and the mand-model procedure in teaching graphic symbol combinations. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 22, 160–177.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nunes, T., & Bryant, P. E. (2006). Improving literacy by teaching morphemes. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Oxley, J., & Norris, J. (2000). Children's use of memory strategies: Relevance to voice output communication aid use. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 16, 79–94.
   Google Scholar
• Paul, R. (Ed.). (1997a). Language development in children who use AAC [Special Section]. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 13, 139–197.
   Google Scholar
• Paul, R. (1997b). Facilitating transitions in language development for children using AAC. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 13, 141–148.
   Google Scholar
• Paul, R., & Norbury, C. (2012). Language disorders from infancy through adolescence: Listening, speaking, reading, writing and communicating (4th ed.). St Louis, MI: Elsevier Mosby.
   Google Scholar
• Pennington, L., Marshall, J., & Goldbart, J. (2007). Describing participants in AAC research and their communicative environments: Guidelines for research and practice. Disability and Rehabilation, 29, 521–535. doi: 776345580 [pii]10.1080/09638280600902794
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pennington, L., & McConachie, H. (2001a). Interaction between children with cerebral palsy and their mothers: The effects of speech intelligibility. International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders, 36, 371–394.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pennington, L., & McConachie, H. (2001b). Predicting patterns of interaction between children with cerebral palsy and their mothers. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 43, 83–90.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pennington, L., Thomson, K., James, P., Martin, L., & McNally, R. (2009). Effects of It Takes Two to Talk – The Hanen Program for parents of preschool children with cerebral palsy: Findings from an exploratory study. Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research, 52, 1121–1138.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pinker, S. (1994). The language instinct: The new science of language and mind. London: The Penguin Press.
   Google Scholar
• Raghavendra, P., Bornman, J., Granlund, M., & Bjorck-Akesson, E. (2007). The World Health Organization's International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health: implications for clinical and research practice in the field of augmentative and alternative communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 23, 349–361. doi: 784705738 [pii]10.1080/07434610701650928
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Redmond, S. M., & Johnston, S. S. (2001). Evaluating the morphological competence of children with severe speech and physical impairments. Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research, 44, 1362–1375.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robillard, M., Mayer-Crittenden, C., Roy-Charland, A., Minor-Corriveau, M., & Bélanger, R. (2013). Exploring the impact of cognition on young children's ability to navitate a speech-generating device. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 29, 347–359.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Romski, M., & Sevcik, R. A. (1989). An analysis of visual-graphic symbol meanings for two nonspeaking adults with severe mental retardation. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 5, 109–114.
   Google Scholar
• Romski, M., & Sevcik, R. A. (1993). Language comprehension: Considerations for Augmentative and Alternative Communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 9, 281–285.
   Google Scholar
• Romski, M., Sevcik, R. A., & Adamson, L. B. (1997). Framework for studying how children with developmental disabilities develop language through augmented means. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 13, 172–178.
   Google Scholar
• Ross, B., & Cress, C. (2006). Comparison of standardized assessments for cognitive and receptive communication skills in young children with complex communication needs. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 22, 100–111.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saxton, M. (2000). Negative evidence and negative feedback: Immediate effects on the grammaticality of child speech. First Language, 20, 221–252. doi: 1010.1177/0142723710370534
   Google Scholar
• Schlosser, R., Shane, H., Sorce, J., Koul, R., Bloomfield, E., Debrowski, L., … & Neff, A. (2012). Animation of graphic symbols representing verbs and prepositions: Effects on transparency, name agreement, and identification. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research., 55, 342–358.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scollon, R. (1976). Conversations with a one year old. Honolulu: University Press of Hawaii.
   Google Scholar
• Sevcik, R. A., & Romski, M. (2002). The role of language comprehension in establishing early augmented conversations. In J. Reichle, D. R. Beukelman, & J. Light (Eds.), Implementing an augmentative communication system: Exemplary strategies for beginning communicators. (pp. 453–474). Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
   Google Scholar
• Sevcik, R. A., Romski, M., & Wilkinson, K. (1991). Roles of graphic symbols in the language acqusition process for persons with severe cognitive disabilities. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 7, 161–170.
   Google Scholar
• Shepherd, T., Campbell, K., Renzoni, A., & Sloan, N. (2009). Reliability of Speech Generating Devices: A 5-year review. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 25, 145–153.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simpson, K. O., Beukelman, D. R., & Sharpe, T. (2000). An elementary student with severe expressive communication impairment in a general education classroom: Sequential analysis of interactions. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 16, 107–121.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, J. L., McCarthy, J., & Benigno, J. (2009). The effect of high-tech AAC system position on the joint attention of infants without disabilities. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 25, 165–175. doi: 10.1080/07434610902972410.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, M. (1994). Speech by any other name: the role of communication aids in interaction. European Journal of Disorders of Communication, 29, 225–241.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Smith, M. (1996). The medium or the message: A study of speaking children using communication boards. In S. von Tetzchner & M. Jensen (Eds.), Augmentative and alternative communication: European perspectives (pp. 119–136). London: Whurr.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, M. (2003). Environmental influences on aided language development: The role of partner adaptation. In S. von Tetzchner & N. Grove (Eds.), Augmentative and Alternative Communication: Developmental Issues (pp. 155–175). London: Whurr.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, M. (2006). Speech, language and aided communication: Connections and questions in a developmental context. Disability and Rehabilitation, 28, 151–157.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, M., & Connolly, I. (2008). Roles of aided communication: perspectives of adults who use AAC. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 3, 260–273. doi: 905849173 [pii]10.1080/17483100802338499
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Smith, M., & Grove, N. (1999). The bimodal situation of children learning language using manual and graphic signs. In F. Loncke, J. Clibbens, H. Arvidson, & L. Lloyd (Eds.), New directions in AAC: Research and practice (pp. 9–30). London: Whurr.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, M., & Grove, N. (2001). Determining utterance boundaries: Problems and strategies. In S. von Tetzchner & J. Clibbens (Eds.), Understanding the theoretical and methodological bases of augmentative and alternative communication (pp. 15–42). Ontario, Canada: ISAAC.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, M., & Grove, N. (2003). Asymmetry in input and output. In J. Light, D. R. Beukelman, & J. Reichle (Eds.), Communicative competence for individuals who use AAC (pp. 163–198). London: Paul H Brookes.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, M., Murray, J., & von Tetzchner, S. (2014, August). The tellability factor: Narratives produced by aided communicators. Paper presented at the Biennial Conference of the International Society for Augmentative and Alternative Communication, Lisbon, Portugal.
   Google Scholar
• Smith-Lewis, M. (1994). Discontinuity in the development of aided Augmentative and Alternative Commnication systems. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 10, 14–26.
   Google Scholar
• Smith-Lewis, M., & Ford, A. (1987). A user's perspective on augmentative communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 3, 12–17.
   Google Scholar
• Soto, G., Hartmann, E., & Wilkins, D. (2006). Exploring the elements of narrative that emerge in the interactions between an 8-year-old child who uses an AAC device and her teacher. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 22, 231–241.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soto, G., & Toro-Zambrana, W. (1995). Investigation of Blissymbol use from a language research paradigm. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 11, 118–129.
   Google Scholar
• Stadskleiv, K., von Tetzchner, S., Batorowicz, B., van Balkom, H., Dahlgren-Sandberg, A., & Renner, G. (2014). Investigating executive functions in children with severe speech and movement disorders using structured tasks. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 992. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00992
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stephenson, J. (2009). Iconicity in the development of picture skills: Typical development and implications for individuals with severe intellectual disabilities. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 25, 187–201.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strapp, C. M., Bleakney, D. M., Helmick, A. L., & Tonkovich, H. M. (2008). Developmental differences in the effects of negative and positive evidence. First Language, 28, 35–53. doi: 10.1177/0142723707084840
   Google Scholar
• Sutton, A. (1989). The social-verbal competence of AAC users. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 5, 150–164.
   Google Scholar
• Sutton, A., & Gallagher, T. (1993). Verb class distinctions and AAC language encoding implications. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 36, 1216–1226.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sutton, A., Gallagher, T., Morford, J., & Shahnaz, N. (2000). Relative clause sentence production using augmentative and alternative communication systems. Applied Psycholinguistics, 21, 473–486.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sutton, A., Gallagher, T., Morford, J., & Shahnaz, N. (2002). Interpretation of graphic symbol utterances. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 18, 205–214.
   Google Scholar
• Sutton, A., & Morford, J. (1998). Constituent order in picture pointing sequences produced by speaking children using AAC. Applied Psycholinguistics, 19, 525–536.
   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.
   Google Scholar
• Sutton, A., Trudeau, N., Morford, J., Rios, M., & Poirier, M. (2010). Preschool-aged children have difficulty constructing and interpreting simple utterances composed of graphic symbols. Journal of Child Language, 37, 1–26.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thistle, J., & Wilkinson, K. (2013). Working memory demands of aided augmentative and alternative communication for individuals with developmental disabilities. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 29, 235–245.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tomasello, M. (2001). The item-based nature of children's early syntactic development. In M. Tomasello & E. Bates (Eds.), Language development: Essential readings (pp. 169–186). London: Blackwell Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Tomasello, M. (2003). Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition. London: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tomasello, M., Conti-Ramsden, G., & Ewert, B. (1990). Young children's conversations with their mothers and fathers: Differences in breakdown and repair. Journal of Child Language, 17, 115–130.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trefler, E., & Crislip, D. (1985). No aid, an Etran, and Minspeak: A comparison of efficiency and effectiveness during structured use. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 1, 151–155.
   Google Scholar
• Trudeau, N., Morford, J., & 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: 10.3109/07434618.2010.481563
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trudeau, N., Sutton, A., Dagenais, E., de Broeck, S., & Morford, J. (2007). Construction of graphic symbol utterances by children, teenagers and adults: The effect of structure and task demands. Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research, 50, 1314–1327.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trudeau, N., Sutton, A., & Morford, J. (2014). An investigation of developmental changes in interpretation and construction of graphic AAC symbol sequences through systematic combination of input and output modalities. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 30, 187–199. doi: 10.3109/07434618.2014.940465
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Udwin, O., & Yule, W. (1990). Augmentative and alternative communication systems taught to cerebral palsied children: A longitudinal study: I. The acquisition of signs and symbols, and syntactic aspects of their use over time. British Journal of Disorders of Communication, 25, 295–309.
   Google Scholar
• Valian, V. (2014). Arguing about innateness. Journal of Child Language, 41(Suppl. S1), 78–92. doi: 10.1017/S0305000914000336
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van der Schuit, M., Segers, E., van Balkom, H., Stoep, J., & Verhoeven, L. (2010). Immersive communication intervention for speaking and non-speaking children with intellectual disabilities. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 26, 203–220. doi: 10.3109/07434618.2010.505609
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vandervelden, M., & Siegel, L. (1999). Phonological processing and literacy in AAC users and students with motor speech impairments. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 15, 191–211.
   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.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• von Tetzchner, S., & Grove, N. (2003). The development of alternative language forms. In S. von Tetzchner & N. Grove (Eds.), Augmentative and alternative communication: Developmental issues (pp. 1–27). London: Whurr.
   Google Scholar
• von Tetzchner, S., & Martinsen, H. (1996). Words and strategies: Communicating with young children who use aided language. In S. von Tetzchner & M. Jensen (Eds.), Augmentative and alternative communication: European perspectives (pp. 65–88). London: Whurr.
   Google Scholar
• von Tetzchner, S., & Martinsen, H. (2000). Introduction to augmentative and alternative communication (2nd ed.). London: Whurr.
   Google Scholar
• Wagner, B. T., & Jackson, H. M. (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 and Hearing Research, 49, 113–126. doi: 1092-4388/06/4901-0113
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Warrick, A. (1988). Sociocommunicative considerations within augmentative and alternative communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 4, 45–51.
   Google Scholar
• Weinert, S. (2009). Implicit and explicit modes of learning: Similarities and differences from a developmental perspective. Linguistics, 47, 241–271.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• White, A. R., Carney, E., & Reichle, J. (2010). Group-item and directed scanning: Examining preschoolers’ accuracy and efficiency in two augmentative communication symbol selection methods. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 19, 311–320. doi: 10.1044/1058-0360(2010/09-0017)
   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.
   Google Scholar
• Yovetich, W., & Young, T. (1988). The effects of representativeness and concreteness on the “guessability” of Blissymbols. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 4, 35–39.
   Google Scholar