A Comparison of Manual Sign and Speech Generating Devices in the Natural Environment

• Published in: Journal of developmental and physical disabilities Vol. 32; no. 5; pp. 785 - 800
• Main Authors: Brodhead, Matthew T., Brouwers, Lauren F., Sipila-Thomas, Emma S., Rispoli, Mandy J.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: New York Springer US 01.10.2020; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Augmentative and alternative communication; Autism; Autism Spectrum Disorders; Behavioral Science and Psychology; Child and School Psychology; Natural environment; Original Article; Pediatrics; Psychology; Public Health; Reinforcement; Speech; Autism; Sign language; Augmentative and alternative communication; Speech-generating device
• ISSN: 1056-263X; 1573-3580
• DOI: 10.1007/s10882-019-09720-1

Between 30 and 50% of individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) do not develop vocal language deemed functionally acceptable to meet their daily communication needs. As a result, individuals with ASD may require intervention alternatives to vocal speech, such as augmentative and alternative communication (AAC). However, very little is known about how members of the public may respond to forms of AAC. The purpose of this study was to evaluate how two commonly used AAC formats, manual sign and a selection-based speech generating device (SGD), result in access to reinforcement in the natural environment. To do this, we approached naïve adults (i.e., individuals unfamiliar with the aims of the study) and asked questions that were likely to result in reinforcement. We measured whether or not naïve adults accurately responded to each question, and we collected additional descriptive information about their reaction to that form of AAC. This study has important implications for social validity and long-term considerations of AAC.