Pictures as communication symbols for students with severe intellectual disability

Language in Low-Functioning Children with Autistic Disorder: Differences Between Receptive and Expressive Skills and Concurrent Predictors of Language

“…Other symbolic abilities, such as understanding of pictures, have not been studied in relation to language abilities yet. Stephenson and Linfoot (1996) argued that the use of pictures as symbols has clear parallels to the use of words as symbols.…”

Translucency and Learnability of Blissymbols in Setswana-speaking Children: An Exploration

“…The learnability of graphic symbols is not only dependent on teaching methods and strategies, but also is influenced by many factors, such as the features or inherent characteristics of the symbol set or system (Fuller, Lloyd, & Stratton, 1997); the individual's own abilities (Light & Lindsay, 1991); motivation (Vanderheiden & Lloyd, 1986); schooling (Duncan, Gourlay, & Hudson, 1973;Martlew & Connolly, 1996); the selected vocabulary (Arvidson & Lloyd, 1997); the individual's previous experience and world knowledge (Stephenson & Linfoot, 1996;Zangari & Kangas, 1997); and representational range and cultural aspects (Huer, 2000(Huer, , 2003Soto, Huer, & Taylor, 1997).…”

The Iconicity of Picture Communication Symbols for Children with English Additional Language and Mild Intellectual Disability

“…Previous experience with symbols will influence the iconicity of graphic symbols for an individual (DeLoache, 1991;Stephenson & Linfoot, 1996). Experience with picture recognition and use assists an individual to perceive the similarity between a picture and a referent and to see this similarity as a relationship between the picture and referent (Stephenson & Linfoot, 1996). The pivotal achievement of symbolic behaviour, termed representational insight, can be seen when children recognise some kind of a relationship between a referent and its symbol (DeLoache, 1995).…”

“…It is based upon previous experiences and their perceived value, which will shape the expectations regarding future behaviour (Rowland & Schweigert, 2003).World knowledge is used to successfully solve problems, perform tasks, interact with others, and participate in any type of cognitive activity (Light & Lindsay, 1991); it is dependent on experience in and of the world (Rowland & Schweigert, 2003). Previous experience with symbols will influence the iconicity of graphic symbols for an individual (DeLoache, 1991;Stephenson & Linfoot, 1996). Experience with picture recognition and use assists an individual to perceive the similarity between a picture and a referent and to see this similarity as a relationship between the picture and referent (Stephenson & Linfoot, 1996).…”

“…The fourth group of effects is individual effects, which may influence judgment about iconicity and may include oral or literate background (Pierce & McWilliam, 1993); schooling (Martlew & Connolly, 1996); culture (Basson & Alant, 2005;Haupt & Alant, 2002;Hetzroni & Harris, 1996;Huer, 2000;Nakamura, Newell, Alm, & Waller, 1998); age (Emms & Gardner, 2010); cognitive or thinking style (Bornman, Alant, & Du Preez, 2009;Taylor & Clarke, 1994;Witkin, 1967); sensorimotor functioning (Mineo Mollica, 2003), world knowledge (Light & Lindsay, 1991); symbol experience (Stephenson & Linfoot, 1996); and language competence (Barton et al, 2006).…”