Initially demonstrated overselectivity.Augment Altern Commun. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 June 01.NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author ManuscriptDube and WilkinsonPageClinicians should therefore consider carefully how to incorporate those motion, size, and color-based cues as a means to attract attention to important information on an AAC display and to reduce the likelihood and consequences of overly narrow observing and attention patterns. The study by McCarthy and colleagues (2006) illustrates this point nicely. Specifically, they examined how well children without disabilities understood the function of the cue in serial single-switch scanning. Traditional scanning cues include a light that appears at the corner of each symbol, one by one until a selection is made, or a colored border enclosing the symbol. To use this cue functionally, an individual must understand that the symbol with the light or the enclosed border is the one currently “on offer.” McCarthy et al (2006) demonstrated that a cue that incorporated motion, specifically each symbol growing and then shrinking in size, improved children’s understanding of the function of the cue over the enclosed border cue. Requiring differential observing responses to all parts of a stimulus holds Duvoglustat supplier particular potential for AAC interventions that support receptive skills of the individual. For instance, visual Deslorelin biological activity schedules that aid children in understanding and predicting the day’s events are composed of multiple components, each one typically representing one of the daily activities. If an individual appears not to be benefitting as expected from these visual schedules, instantiating differential observing responses at the outset of the day (and throughout, as needed) may promote better observation of each of the events being represented and thus, the likelihood of the individual understanding what is upcoming. Specifically, asking the child to point to each activity at the outset of the day and then on an ongoing basis throughout is an example of a differential observing response. Similarly, instruction on production of multi-symbol utterances that use some form of visual model may also benefit from implementation of differential observing responses to each of the elements. Once more, this might take the form of specifically asking a child to point to each element of the multi-symbol message as the adult model occurs.NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author ManuscriptFuture Research AgendaWe have argued that at least some of the errors made by individuals who use AAC might be traced to presence of an overly narrow pattern of observing stimuli (stimulus overselectivity), including the types of stimuli that appear on AAC systems. If individuals who use AAC displays attend only to specific features of symbols on a display, they may fail to distinguish among symbols that share that particular feature. Hence, an individual who attends selectively to the stem on the top of a symbol may appear to confuse APPLE (a red, round fruit) with PEAR (an ovate, yellowish fruit). Or an individual who attends only to the first letters of a word (push) may similarly demonstrate errors when another word that shares those initial letters is introduced (pull). Indeed, in a demonstration of sight word vocabulary instruction in AAC, Wilkinson and Albert (2001) reported on just such a pattern in a learner who showed errorless learning until the words.Initially demonstrated overselectivity.Augment Altern Commun. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 June 01.NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author ManuscriptDube and WilkinsonPageClinicians should therefore consider carefully how to incorporate those motion, size, and color-based cues as a means to attract attention to important information on an AAC display and to reduce the likelihood and consequences of overly narrow observing and attention patterns. The study by McCarthy and colleagues (2006) illustrates this point nicely. Specifically, they examined how well children without disabilities understood the function of the cue in serial single-switch scanning. Traditional scanning cues include a light that appears at the corner of each symbol, one by one until a selection is made, or a colored border enclosing the symbol. To use this cue functionally, an individual must understand that the symbol with the light or the enclosed border is the one currently “on offer.” McCarthy et al (2006) demonstrated that a cue that incorporated motion, specifically each symbol growing and then shrinking in size, improved children’s understanding of the function of the cue over the enclosed border cue. Requiring differential observing responses to all parts of a stimulus holds particular potential for AAC interventions that support receptive skills of the individual. For instance, visual schedules that aid children in understanding and predicting the day’s events are composed of multiple components, each one typically representing one of the daily activities. If an individual appears not to be benefitting as expected from these visual schedules, instantiating differential observing responses at the outset of the day (and throughout, as needed) may promote better observation of each of the events being represented and thus, the likelihood of the individual understanding what is upcoming. Specifically, asking the child to point to each activity at the outset of the day and then on an ongoing basis throughout is an example of a differential observing response. Similarly, instruction on production of multi-symbol utterances that use some form of visual model may also benefit from implementation of differential observing responses to each of the elements. Once more, this might take the form of specifically asking a child to point to each element of the multi-symbol message as the adult model occurs.NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author ManuscriptFuture Research AgendaWe have argued that at least some of the errors made by individuals who use AAC might be traced to presence of an overly narrow pattern of observing stimuli (stimulus overselectivity), including the types of stimuli that appear on AAC systems. If individuals who use AAC displays attend only to specific features of symbols on a display, they may fail to distinguish among symbols that share that particular feature. Hence, an individual who attends selectively to the stem on the top of a symbol may appear to confuse APPLE (a red, round fruit) with PEAR (an ovate, yellowish fruit). Or an individual who attends only to the first letters of a word (push) may similarly demonstrate errors when another word that shares those initial letters is introduced (pull). Indeed, in a demonstration of sight word vocabulary instruction in AAC, Wilkinson and Albert (2001) reported on just such a pattern in a learner who showed errorless learning until the words.
