Interplay between verbal response latency and physiology of children with autism during ECA interactions

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Theodora Chaspari ◽  
Chi-Chun Lee ◽  
Shrikanth Narayanan
Keyword(s):  
Response Latency ◽  
Children With Autism ◽  
Verbal Response

Latency of Echoic Verbal Responses by Three-Year-Old Children

1970 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 232-238 ◽  
Author(s):  
John H. Saxman ◽  
Warren H. Fay
Keyword(s):  
Response Latency ◽  
Verbal Response ◽  
Average Response ◽  
Verbal Stimuli ◽  
Verbal Comprehension ◽  
Verbal Responses ◽  
Routine Administration ◽  
Average Latency ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Average Response Latency

The echoic responses of 59 three-year-old children were tape recorded during the routine administration of a verbal comprehension test. They were unsolicited echoes of the examiner’s statements rather than requested imitations as in previous latency studies of verbal responses. The response latency distribution was skewed positively with the mean and median latencies occurring at 0.88 and 0.78 sees, respectively. Comparisons between average latency values at three levels of stimulus conceptual complexity did not result in significant differences. Average response latency values were found also not to be different for verbal stimuli intending a motor response or verbal stimuli intending a verbal response. The results tended to support descriptions of echolalia as a relatively simple verbal response though further research is indicated. It was concluded also that the echoic response latency is independent of the linguistic parameters of the eliciting stimulus.

Increased Diagnostic Value of the Taylor Manifest Anxiety Scale by Use of Response Latency

1967 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-67 ◽  
Author(s):  
Albin R. Gilbert
Keyword(s):  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Response Latency ◽  
Diagnostic Value ◽  
Anxiety Scale ◽  
Verbal Response ◽  
High Anxiety ◽  
Taylor Manifest Anxiety Scale ◽  
Paper And Pencil ◽  
Social Introversion ◽  
Manifest Anxiety

30 undergraduate students were presented both stimulus items from the Taylor Manifest Anxiety Scale and their reversals randomly with a Hunter Cardmaster and Printout counter. High-anxiety and low-anxiety cutoff groups were formed using the 10 highest and 10 lowest MAS scores. Latency-weighted responses ranged from 6 (highest MAS score) to 1 (lowest MAS score). Four anxiety scores on specific dimensions, hysteria, psychasthenia, depression, and social introversion, were selected for study. The latency-weighted scores are felt to be more valid than paper-and-pencil scores because latency-weighting qualifies each verbal response in terms of 1 to 6.

Phonomotor Versus Semantic Feature Analysis Treatment for Anomia in 58 Persons With Aphasia: A Randomized Controlled Trial

2019 ◽  
Vol 62 (12) ◽  
pp. 4464-4482 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diane L. Kendall ◽  
Megan Oelke Moldestad ◽  
Wesley Allen ◽  
Janaki Torrence ◽  
Stephen E. Nadeau
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Response Latency ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Semantic Knowledge ◽  
Semantic Feature ◽  
Feature Analysis ◽  
Group Differences ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Confrontation Naming ◽  
Semantic Feature Analysis

Purpose The ultimate goal of anomia treatment should be to achieve gains in exemplars trained in the therapy session, as well as generalization to untrained exemplars and contexts. The purpose of this study was to test the efficacy of phonomotor treatment, a treatment focusing on enhancement of phonological sequence knowledge, against semantic feature analysis (SFA), a lexical-semantic therapy that focuses on enhancement of semantic knowledge and is well known and commonly used to treat anomia in aphasia. Method In a between-groups randomized controlled trial, 58 persons with aphasia characterized by anomia and phonological dysfunction were randomized to receive 56–60 hr of intensively delivered treatment over 6 weeks with testing pretreatment, posttreatment, and 3 months posttreatment termination. Results There was no significant between-groups difference on the primary outcome measure (untrained nouns phonologically and semantically unrelated to each treatment) at 3 months posttreatment. Significant within-group immediately posttreatment acquisition effects for confrontation naming and response latency were observed for both groups. Treatment-specific generalization effects for confrontation naming were observed for both groups immediately and 3 months posttreatment; a significant decrease in response latency was observed at both time points for the SFA group only. Finally, significant within-group differences on the Comprehensive Aphasia Test–Disability Questionnaire ( Swinburn, Porter, & Howard, 2004 ) were observed both immediately and 3 months posttreatment for the SFA group, and significant within-group differences on the Functional Outcome Questionnaire ( Glueckauf et al., 2003 ) were found for both treatment groups 3 months posttreatment. Discussion Our results are consistent with those of prior studies that have shown that SFA treatment and phonomotor treatment generalize to untrained words that share features (semantic or phonological sequence, respectively) with the training set. However, they show that there is no significant generalization to untrained words that do not share semantic features or phonological sequence features.

Instruction Using Augmentative and Alternative Communication Supports: Description of Current Practices by Speech-Language Pathologists Who Work With Children With Autism Spectrum Disorder

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 586-596 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kaitlyn A. Clarke ◽  
Diane L. Williams
Keyword(s):  
Autism Spectrum Disorder ◽  
Augmentative And Alternative Communication ◽  
Communication Systems ◽  
Diagnostic Category ◽  
Children With Autism ◽  
Autism Spectrum ◽  
Spectrum Disorder ◽  
Alternative Communication ◽  
Speech Language Pathologists ◽  
Processing Differences

Purpose The aim of this research study was to examine common practices of speech-language pathologists (SLPs) who work with children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) with respect to whether or not SLPs consider processing differences in ASD or the effects of input during their instruction. Method Following a qualitative research method, how SLPs instruct and present augmentative and alternative communication systems to individuals with ASD, their rationale for method selection, and their perception of the efficacy of selected interventions were probed. Semistructured interviews were conducted as part of an in-depth case report with content analysis. Results Based on completed interviews, 4 primary themes were identified: (a) instructional method , (b) input provided , (c) decision-making process , and (d) perceived efficacy of treatment . Additionally, one secondary theme, training and education received , was identified . Conclusions Clinicians reported making decisions based on the needs of the child; however, they also reported making decisions based on the diagnostic category that characterized the child (i.e., ASD). The use of modeling when teaching augmentative and alternative communication to individuals with ASD emerged as a theme, but variations in the method of modeling were noted. SLPs did not report regularly considering processing differences in ASD, nor did they consider the effects of input during instruction.

Disfluency Characteristics Observed in Young Children With Autism Spectrum Disorders: A Preliminary Report

2010 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 42-50 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura W. Plexico ◽  
Julie E. Cleary ◽  
Ashlynn McAlpine ◽  
Allison M. Plumb
Keyword(s):  
Autism Spectrum Disorders ◽  
Young Children ◽  
Children With Autism ◽  
Descriptive Study ◽  
Autism Spectrum ◽  
Typically Developing ◽  
Children With Asd ◽  
Young Children With Autism ◽  
Spectrum Disorders ◽  
Developmental Stuttering

This descriptive study evaluates the speech disfluencies of 8 verbal children between 3 and 5 years of age with autism spectrum disorders (ASD). Speech samples were collected for each child during standardized interactions. Percentage and types of disfluencies observed during speech samples are discussed. Although they did not have a clinical diagnosis of stuttering, all of the young children with ASD in this study produced disfluencies. In addition to stuttering-like disfluencies and other typical disfluencies, the children with ASD also produced atypical disfluencies, which usually are not observed in children with typically developing speech or developmental stuttering. (Yairi & Ambrose, 2005).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document