Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Nature and Function of Vocalizations in Atypical Communication

  • Hot Topic
  • Published:
Current Developmental Disorders Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

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.

Recent Findings

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.

Summary

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

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.

  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 

  3. Jette AM. The promise of assistive technology to enhance work participation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2017. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/pzx054.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  4. Branson D, Demchak M. The use of augmentative and alternative communication methods with infants and toddlers with disabilities: a research review. AAC: Augment Altern Commun. 2009;25(4):274–86. https://doi.org/10.3109/07434610903384529.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Lund SK, Light J. The effectiveness of grammar instruction for individuals who use augmentative and alternative communication systems: a preliminary study. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2003;46(5):1110–23 Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14575346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Müller E, Soto G. Conversation patterns of three adults using aided speech: variations across partners. Augment Altern Commun. 2002;18(2):77–90. https://doi.org/10.1080/07434610212331281181.

    Article  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.

    Article  Google 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 

  9. Ferm U, Ahlsén E, Björck-Åkesson E. Conversational topics between a child with complex communication needs and her caregiver at mealtime. Augment Altern Commun. 2005;21(1):19–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/07434610412331270507.

    Article  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.

  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 

  12. Lancioni GE, Lems S. Using a microswitch for vocalization responses with persons with multiple disabilities. Disabil Rehabil. 2001;23(16):745–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638280110057677.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Pickering L, Di Ferrante L, Bruce C, Friginal E, Pearson P, Bouchard J. An introduction to the ANAWC the AAC and non-AAC workplace corpus. Int J Corpus Linguist. 2019;24(2):229–44. https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.17088.pic.

    Article  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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Bouchard J. Spelling as a last resort: the use of spelling in workplace interaction by speakers with a speech impairment. In: Pickering L, Friginal E, Staple S, editors. Talking at work. London: Palgrave MacMillan; 2016. p. 55–77.

    Chapter  Google 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Tincani M. Comparing the picture exchange communication system and sign language training for children with autism. Focus Autism Other Dev Disabil. 2004;19(3):152–63. https://doi.org/10.1177/10883576040190030301.

    Article  Google 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.

    Article  Google 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.

    Article  Google 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Olive ML, de la Cruz B, Davis TN, Chan JM, Lang RB, O’Reilly MF, et al. The effects of enhanced milieu teaching and a voice output communication aid on the requesting of three children with autism. J Autism Dev Disord. 2007;37:1505–13.

    Article  Google 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.

  23. Flipsen P. Speaker-listener familiarity: parents as judges of delayed speech intelligibility. J Commun Dis. 1995;28:3–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. D’Innocenzo J, Tjaden K, Greenman G. Intelligibility in dysarthria: effects of listener familiarity and speaking condition. Clin Ling Phon. 2006;20(9):659–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Kim H, Nanney S. Familiarization effects on word intelligibility in dysarthric speech. Folia Phoniatr Logop. 2014;66(6):258–64. https://doi.org/10.1159/000369799.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Patel R, Schroeder B. Influence of familiarity on identifying prosodic vocalizations produced by children with severe dysarthria. Clin Ling Phon. 2007;21(10):833–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699200701559476.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Kwiatkowski J, Shriberg LD. Intelligibility assessment in developmental phonological disorders: accuracy of caregiver gloss. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 1992;35(5):1095–104.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Barefoot SM, Bochner JH, Johnson BA, Eigen BA. Rating deaf speakers’ comprehensibility: an exploratory investigation. Am J Speech-Lang Pathol. 1993;2(3):31–5.

    Article  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.

  30. Pinto M, Gardner H. Communicative interaction between a non-speaking child with cerebral palsy and her mother using an iPad TM. Child Lang Teach Ther. 2014;30(2):207–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265659013518338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Odom AC, Upthegrove M. Moving toward employment using AAC: case study. Augment Altern Commun. 1997;13(4):258–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/07434619712331278078.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Cagliani RR, Ayres KM, Whiteside E, Ringdahl JE. Picture exchange communication system and delay to reinforcement. J Dev Phys Disabil. 2017;29(6):925–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10882-017-9564-y.

    Article  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.

  35. Lancioni GE, O’Reilly ME, Oliva D, Coppa MM. A microswitch for vocalization responses to foster environmental control in children with multiple disabilities. J Intellect Disabil Res. 2001;45:271–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Lancioni GE, Singh NN, O’Reilly ME, Oliva D, Baccani S, Canevaro A. Using simple hand-movement responses with optic microswitches with two persons with multiple disabilities. Res Pract Persons Severe Disabil. 2002;27:276–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Lancioni GE, Singh NN, O’Reilly ME, Oliva D, Scalini L, Vigo CM, et al. Microswitch clusters to support responding and appropriate posture of students with multiple disabilities: three case evaluations. Disabil Rehabil. 2004;26:501–5.

    Article  CAS  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 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dipartimento di Comunicazione e Ricerca Sociale, Sapienza Università di Roma, Via Salaria, 113, Roma, Italy

    Laura Di Ferrante

  2. Département des arts et lettres, 555, Boulevard de l’Université, Chicoutimi, Québec, G7H 2B1, Canada

    Julie Bouchard

Authors
  1. Laura Di Ferrante
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Julie Bouchard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Laura Di Ferrante.

Ethics declarations

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.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Di Ferrante, L., Bouchard, J. The Nature and Function of Vocalizations in Atypical Communication. Curr Dev Disord Rep 7, 23–27 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40474-020-00186-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40474-020-00186-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation