Demonstration of a method for assessing semantic organization and category membership in individuals with autism spectrum disorders and receptive vocabulary limitations

References

• Bauer P. J., Mandler J. M. Taxonomies and triads: Conceptual organization in one- to two-year olds. Cognitive Psychology 1989; 21: 156–184
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blaye A., Bonthoux F. Thematic and taxonomic relations in preschoolers: The development of flexibility in categorization choices. British Journal of Developmental Psychology 2001; 19: 395–412
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brady N. C., Saunders K. J. Considerations in the effective teaching of object to symbol matching. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 1991; 7: 112–116
   Google Scholar
• Beukelman D. R., Mirenda P. Augmentative and Alternative Communication: Management of severe communication disorders in children and adults (2nd ed.). Paul H. Brookes, Baltimore, MD 1998
   Google Scholar
• Carter D. E., Werner T. J. Complex learning and information processing by pigeons: A critical analysis. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 1978; 29: 565–601
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dube W. V. Computer software for stimulus control research with Macintosh computers. Experimental Analysis of Human Behavior Bulletin 1991; 9: 28–30
   Google Scholar
• Dunn L. M., Dunn L. M. Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test – Revised. American Guidance Service, Circle Pines, MN 1985
   Google Scholar
• Dunn L. M., Dunn L. M. Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test – III. American Guidance Service, Circle Pines, MN 1997
   Google Scholar
• Fallon K., Light J., Achenbach A. The semantic organization patterns of young children: Implications for Augmentative and Alternative Communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 2003; 19: 74–85
   Google Scholar
• Franklin K., Mirenda P., Phillips G. Comparison of five symbol assessment protocols with nondisabled preschoolers and learners with severe intellectual disabilities. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 1996; 12: 63–77
   Google Scholar
• Goolkasian P. Picture-word differences in a sentence verification task. Memory and Cognition 1996; 24: 584–594
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goossens' C., Crain S., Elder P. Engineering the preschool environment for interactive, symbolic communication. Southeast Augmentative Communication Conference Publications, Birmingham, AL 1992
   Google Scholar
• Hux K., Rankin J., Beukelman D., Hahn D. Alternative procedures for neurologically impaired populations. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 1993; 9: 119–125
   Google Scholar
• Handbook of research methods in human operant behavior, K. A. Lattal, M. Perone. Plenum Press, New York 1998
   Google Scholar
• McIlvane W. J. Stimulus control analysis and nonverbal instructional methods for people with intellectual disabilities. International review of research in mental retardation, N. W. Bray. Academic Press, Inc., San Diego, CA 1992; 1: 55–109
   Google Scholar
• McIlvane W. J., Dube W. V., Green G., Serna R. W. Programming conceptual and communication skill development. Communication and language intervention series: Vol. 2. Enhancing children's communication: Research foundations for intervention, A. P. Kaiser, D. B. Gray. Paul H. Brookes, Baltimore, MD 1993; 242–285
   Google Scholar
• Mizuko M., Reichle J. Transparency and recall of symbols among intellectually handicapped adults. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders 1989; 54: 627–633
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Osborne J. G., Calhoun D. O. Themes, taxons, and trial types in children's matching to sample: Methodological considerations. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 1998; 68: 35–51
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Implementing an augmentative communication system: Exemplary strategies for beginning communicators, J. Reichle, D. Beukelman, J. Light. Paul H. Brookes, Baltimore, MD 2002
   Google Scholar
• Rips L., Shoben J., Smith E. Semantic distance and the verification of semantic relations. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 1973; 12: 1–20
   Google Scholar
• Romski M. A., Sevick R. A. Breaking the speech barrier: Language development through augmented means. Paul H. Brookes, Baltimore, MD 1996
   Google Scholar
• Rosch E. Cognitive representations and semantic categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 1975; 104: 192–233
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simpson K. O., Hux K., Beukelman D. R., Lutt S., Gaebler C. A. Two-item comparison task to assess category structure. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 1996; 12: 181–187
   Google Scholar
• Smiley S. S., Brown A. L. Conceptual preference for thematic or taxonomic relations: A nonmonotonic trend from preschool to old age. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 1979; 28: 437–458
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stromer R., Mackay H. A. Teaching computer-based spelling to individuals with developmental and hearing disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 1996; 29: 25–43
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Traylor V. S. The effect of taxonomic and thematic organization on typically developing preschoolers' matching in a dynamic display. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Dissertation Abstracts International 2004; 64: 6050
   Google Scholar
• Waxman S. R., Namy L. L. Challenging the notion of a thematic preference in young children. Developmental Psychology 1997; 33: 555–567
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilkinson K. M., Albert A. Adaptations of “fast mapping” for vocabulary intervention with augmented language users. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 2001; 17: 120–132
   Google Scholar