In this systematic replication of a previous study (R. W. Schlosser, D. M. Blischak, P. J. Belfiore, C. Bartley, and N. Barnett, 1998), the effects of speech and print feedback on spelling performance were evaluated. Four children with autism and no functional speech were taught to spell words with a speech-generating device under 3 feedback conditions. In the auditory-visual condition, children received both speech and print feedback, whereas in the auditory and visual conditions, only 1 type of feedback was provided. An adapted alternating treatments design was used. All 4 children reached criterion across conditions. Although 3 children reached criterion first with print or speech-print feedback, 1 child was most efficient with speech-print followed by speech feedback. Based on the findings of both studies, 2 distinct profiles of feedback efficiency are proposed. Children that exemplify the primarily visual profile spell words most efficiently when feedback involves print. Children that fit the auditory profile spell words most efficiently when feedback involves speech. The implications for understanding the learning characteristics of children with autism, as well as those for practice and further research are derived.

No abstract

Technological advances in augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) have provided a "voice" to many persons through voice output communication aids and talking word processors. This voice has been hypothesized to have advantages over less expensive communication boards and traditional word processors. In our time, one of resource efficiency and evidence-based practices, it is essential to examine the evidence. This systematic review synthesizes theory and research on the use of speech output to determine the potential benefits of its use by persons with autism. Directions for future research are proposed, based on identified methodological and knowledge gaps.Various studies have estimated that 25% to 61% of children V

The effects of auditory stimuli in the form of synthetic speech output on the learning of graphic symbols were evaluated. Three adults with severe to profound mental retardation and communication impairments were taught to point to lexigrams when presented with words under two conditions. In the first condition, participants used a voice output communication aid to receive synthetic speech as antecedent and consequent stimuli. In the second condition, with a nonelectronic communications board, participants did not receive synthetic speech. A parallel treatments design was used to evaluate the effects of the synthetic speech output as an added component of the augmentative and alternative communication system. The 3 participants reached criterion when not provided with the auditory stimuli. Although 2 participants also reached criterion when not provided with the auditory stimuli, the addition of auditory stimuli resulted in more efficient learning and a decreased error rate. Maintenance results, however, indicated no differences between conditions. Finding suggest that auditory stimuli in the form of synthetic speech contribute to the efficient acquisition of graphic communication symbols.

One of the most frequently cited concerns from parents, teachers, and other caregivers, upon hearing a recommendation for the use of augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) is, 'Will its use interfere with natural speech?' Reports of positive effects of AAC use, particularly that of speech output, are increasingly available, whereas evidence to support negative consequences of AAC use has not been widely reported. In this paper, possible explanations for increases in natural speech production associated with AAC use are explored, along with a discussion of clinical implications and future research.