The Nature and Function of Vocalizations in Atypical Communication
Purpose of Review
A survey of current research including people with disorders in which speech is impaired shows that vocalizations are vastly discussed as a communication strategy, used both in isolation or paired with other aids. The principal goal of this paper is to describe the ways researchers are using the term vocalizations and the meanings and functions attributed to it. We also discuss possible future developments for specific research on unaided communication.
Although research has not focused specifically on the nature and function of vocalizations, several scholars were able to highlight the crucial role of vocalizations in interactions including people with complex communication needs.
This paper has demonstrated the need for systematizing the discourse on vocalizations both in formal terms and in regard to the object of study itself. Furthermore, it has been shown that vocalizations have a powerful interactional potential, which, if investigated, could be exploited by dedicated training and technology.
KeywordsVocalizations Augmentative and alternative communication AAC users Unaided communication Complex communication needs Atypical communication
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
Laura Di Ferrante and Julie Bouchard declare no conflicts of interest relevant to this manuscript.
Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent
This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.
Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance
- 1.• Wilkinson R, Bloch S, Clarke M. On the use of graphic resources in interaction by people with communication disorders. In: In Streeck J, Goodwin C, LeBaron C, editors. Embodied interaction: Language and body in the material world, 152–168: Cambridge University Press; 2011. This study refers to vocalizations and how people with communication disorders use them with graphic resources. Google Scholar
- 2.Glennen SL. Augmentative and alternative communication systems. In: Glennen SL, DeCoste DC, editors. The handbook of augmentative and alternative communication. London: Singular Publishing Group; 1997.Google Scholar
- 7.•• Dahlgren Sandberg A, Liliedahl M. Patterns in early interaction between young preschool children with severe speech and physical impairments and their parents. Child Lang Teach Ther. 2008;24(1):9–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265659007084566This study describes the communicative functions of vocalizations along with other body language means. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.Bianquin N, Sacchi F, Besio S. Enhancing communication and participation using AAC technologies for children with motor impairments: a systematic review 1. Educ Sci Soc. 2018;1:49–72.Google Scholar
- 10.Hill KJ, Romich B. A. AAC core vocabulary analysis: tools for clinical use. Proceedings of the RESNA 2000 Annual Conference 2000:3:67–69.Google Scholar
- 11.Millikin CC. Symbol systems and vocabulary selection strategies. In: Glennen S, DeCoste DC, editors. The handbook of augmentative and alternative communication. London: Singular Publishing Group; 1997.Google Scholar
- 14.• Lancioni GE, Singh NN, O’Reilly MF, Oliva D, Groeneweg J. Enabling a girl with multiple disabilities to control her favorite stimuli through vocalization and a dual- microphone microswitch. J Vis Impair Blind. 2005:179–82 This study defines vocalization, which is used to activate a dual-microphone microswitch to initiate a change of stimuli. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.Ganz JB, Simpson RL. Effects on communicative requesting and speech development of the picture exchange communication system in children with characteristics of autism. J Autism Dev Disord. 2004;34(4):395–409. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:JADD.0000037416.59095.d7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 18.•• Clarke M, Kirton A. Patterns of interaction between children with physical disabilities using augmentative and alternative communication systems and their peers. Child Lang Teach Ther. 2003;19(2):135–51. https://doi.org/10.1191/0265659003ct248oaThis study defines vocalizations and analyzes them both quantitatively and in terms of communicative functions. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 19.•• Sigafoos J, Didden R, O’Reilly M. Effects of speech output on maintenance of requesting and frequency of vocalizations in three children with developmental disabilities. Augment Altern Commun. 2003, 19(1):37–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/0743461032000056487This study defines vocalizations and analyzes their frequency in presence of digitized speech output. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.• Nunes D, Hanline MF. Enhancing the alternative and augmentative communication use of a child with autism through a parent-implemented naturalistic intervention. Int J Disabil Dev Educ. 2007;54(2):177–97. https://doi.org/10.1080/10349120701330495This study describes the communicative functions of vocalizations along with other body language means and analyzed their frequency. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.Di Ferrante L. Small talk at work: a corpus-based discourse analysis of AAC and non-AAC device users. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Texas A&M University – Commerce, TX; 2013.Google Scholar
- 29.• Bouchard J, Di Ferrante L, Pickering L, El Khatib N. What can corpora tell us about AAC users’ discourse in the workplace? Manuscript submitted for publication 2019. This study investigates the differences between the discourse produced with vocalization and VOCA by the same four speakers. Google Scholar
- 33.Tincani M, Crozier S, Alazetta L. The picture exchange communication system: effects on manding and speech development for school-aged children with ASD. Educ Train Dev Disabil. 2006;41:177–84.Google Scholar
- 34.Millikin CC. personal communication, 2019.Google Scholar
- 38.Antaki C, Wilkinson R. Conversation analysis and the study of atypical populations. In: Sidnell J, Stivers T, editors. The handbook of conversation analysis. Chichester: Wiley Blackwell; 2013. p. 533–50.Google Scholar