Expressive and receptive performance with graphic symbol sentences by individuals who use aided communication

Abstract

This study explored performance on expressive and receptive graphic symbol tasks and spoken comprehension by individuals who use augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) as well as the relationship of performance with participants’ skills and characteristics. Participants were 19 children and youth (aged 5- to 18-years-old) who used aided communication. Four experimental tasks were administered, with either speech or symbols as input (stimuli) and symbols or choice from an array of pictures as output (response). Symbols were not accompanied by written or spoken labels in the tasks. Measures of receptive vocabulary, receptive syntax, memory, and visual cognitive skills as well as information regarding participant characteristics were collected. There were strong relationships among all experimental tasks. Cluster analysis revealed different response patterns that may suggest a progression in expressive and receptive performance with graphic symbol sentences. Individual differences in receptive language, particularly receptive syntax, were related to task performance. The findings suggest that different ways of experiencing symbols, in addition to spoken comprehension of the sentences and receptive spoken language more generally, may contribute to expressive graphic symbol sentences. Performance on receptive symbol tasks may uncover a level of facility with the graphic-symbol modality not observed through expressive symbol use in communicative situations.

Keywords:

• Aided communication
• expressive graphic symbols
• graphic symbol sentences
• receptive graphic symbols

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to acknowledge the assistance of the rehabilitation centers for participant recruitment and thank the participants for their important contributions and the research assistants who conducted the testing.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This study was supported by funds awarded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) of Canada to the first four authors.