Search

The communicative behavior of young children with significant cognitive and motor developmental delays is generally considered to be limited, idiosyncratic and non-intentional. At present, changes between and within children over time regarding their communicative behavior are hard to detect. This article describes an exploratory observational study that draws on data from the first data point of 38 children who are participating in a longitudinal project on the developmental trajectories of children with significant cognitive and motor developmental delays. The aims of this study were to (a) describe the participants' communicative behavior in detail with communication-related variables that reflect differences across individuals, (b) create summarizing variables and (c) explore whether subgroups of children can be detected. A self-developed coding scheme and descriptive statistics combined with correlational analyses were used, followed by a principal component analysis and visual inspection of the outcome of this analysis. The within-group differences related to communicative behavior was characterized using 16 variables. Based on these variables, three overarching components were formulated: communication proficiency, Expressions of Discomfort and Rejection and Differentiation According to Focus. All participating children were found to be unique in terms of their component scores and the relationship among their component scores. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this study was to develop a coding scheme that enables researchers and practitioners to conduct a detailed analysis of the communicative behavior of young children with significant cognitive and motor developmental delays. Currently, there is a paucity of methods to do conduct such an analysis. For the study, video observations of three different scenarios from 38 children with significant cognitive and motor developmental delays aged between 12 and 54 months, were used. Findings from the video observations served as the primary means for development of the coding scheme, which comprises three main categories – context, partner behavior, and individual behavior – and several subcategories. The coding scheme was used to document the early expressive communicative behavior of persons with significant cognitive and motor developmental delays in a detailed manner. This fine-grained information is necessary to differentiate children based on their communicative abilities, to monitor their communicative development longitudinally, and to inform person-centered communicative interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While children with developmental language disorder or Williams syndrome appear to use hand gestures to compensate for specific cognitive and communicative difficulties, they have different cognitive strength-weakness profiles. Their semantic and visuospatial skills potentially affect gesture quality such as iconicity. The present study focuses on untangling the unique contribution of these skills in the quality of gestures. An explicit gesture elicitation task was presented to 25 participants with developmental language disorder between 7 and 10 years of age, 25 age-matched peers with typical development, and 14 participants with Williams Syndrome (8−23 years). They gestured pictures of objects without using speech (pantomime). The iconicity, semantic richness, and representation technique of the pantomimes were coded. Participants' semantic association and visuospatial skills were formally assessed. Iconicity was slightly lower in individuals with Williams syndrome, which seems related to their visuospatial deficit. While semantic saliency was similar across participant groups, small differences in representation technique were found. Partial correlations showed that visuospatial skills and semantic skills were instrumental in producing clear pantomimes. These findings indicate that clinicians aiming to enhance individuals' natural iconic gestures should consider achieved iconicity, particularly in individuals with low visuospatial skills. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of the present study was to examine the relationship between the use of key word signing (KWS) by support staff and by adults with intellectual disabilities (clients) who had experience with using KWS. Specifically, we explored whether these clients were more inclined to use KWS when sup- port staff used KWS or imitated signs. One-to-one conversations between 24 clients and their support staff were filmed and transcribed. Partner turns were coded for communication mode (spoken or signed) and KWS response type (i.e., imitation, repetition, or new), while client turns were coded for communication mode and novelty (novel or non-novel). Using Cramer's V, strength of association was measured between each partner and subsequent client turn. Results indicated a moderate to strong association between partners' and clients' communication mode. In addition, partner turns containing newly introduced signs were associated with non-novel signed client turns, whereas sign imitations and repetitions by partners were more often followed by novel than non-novel signed client turns. These findings suggest that a balanced KWS input that includes new signed lexical items and sign imitations/repetitions may help to facilitate clients' KWS production and maintenance. This study was exploratory, and further research is needed to validate these results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Even though use of aided augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) by staff has been extensively researched, few studies relate to unaided AAC strategies such as key word signing (KWS). We explored the KWS views of two groups: direct support staff in group residential homes and teachers from special education secondary schools. We examined transcripts from individual semi-structured interviews with five direct support staff and five teachers using thematic analysis. Participants discussed consistency of KWS use and reasons for implementing KWS. Compared to direct support staff, teachers described more use of KWS throughout the day with more individuals with intellectual disability. Teachers discussed use of KWS to facilitate students’ present and future interactions, while direct support staff primarily discussed immediate effects. Participants experienced KWS implementation as a learning process and aimed to turn the use of manual signs into a routine habit. This required considerable self-monitoring, and the effort that this continuous self-feedback required, combined with environmental factors, could hinder KWS implementation. These preliminary findings suggest that preservice KWS training and on-site KWS assistance may need to be enhanced. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]