Clinical Feasibility of Receptive Measures for Autistic Children With Minimal Spoken Language

What is it about?

Purpose: The primary aim of this study was to explore the clinical feasibility of using alternate word-understanding assessment modalities for autistic children who have minimal verbal skills. Specifically, assessment duration, occurrence of disruptive behavior, and no-response trials were examined across three word-understanding assessment conditions: a low-tech condition, a touchscreen condition, and a condition that used real-object stimuli. A secondary aim was to examine the relationship between disruptive behavior and assessment outcomes. Method: Twenty-seven autistic children between the ages of 3 and 12 years who had minimal verbal skills completed 12 test items on the three assessment conditions. Repeated-measures analyses of variance with post hoc Bonferroni procedures were used to describe and compare assessment duration, occurrence of disruptive behavior, and no-response trials across conditions. A Spearman rank-order correlation coefficient was used to examine the relationship between disruptive behavior and assessment outcomes. Results: The real-object assessment condition took significantly longer than the low-tech and touchscreen conditions. Participants engaged in disruptive behavior most frequently during the low-tech condition; however, differences among conditions were not significant. There were significantly more no-response trials in the low-tech condition than in the touchscreen condition. There was a significant, weak negative correlation between disruptive behavior and experimental assessment outcomes. Conclusion: Results show there is promise in using real objects and touchscreen devices to assess word understanding in autistic children who have minimal verbal skills.

Featured Image

Why is it important?

It is often difficult to gain an accurate measure of word-understanding abilities in autistic children with minimal spoken language. Currently available assessments might result in artificially low test scores. This study explores clinical factors (including administration time, occurrence of behaviors indicating distress, and responding) in three word-understanding assessment conditions. Clinical implications and recommendations are discussed.