↓ Skip to main content

FACILITATING CONVERSATION THROUGH SELF‐INITIATED AUGMENTATIVE COMMUNICATION TREATMENT

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, February 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source

Citations

dimensions_citation
54 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
FACILITATING CONVERSATION THROUGH SELF‐INITIATED AUGMENTATIVE COMMUNICATION TREATMENT
Published in
Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, February 2013
DOI 10.1901/jaba.1991.24-369
Pubmed ID
Authors

John Dattilo, Stephen Camarata

Abstract

We examined the conversational skills of 2 adult males with severe motor and speech deficits resulting from cerebral palsy. A multiple baseline design across subjects was used to determine the effectiveness of an intervention strategy designed to teach them to use an augmentative communication system (Touch Talker) independently. The dependent measure was the number of conversation initiations relative to conversation reactions during spontaneous communication across baseline and treatment. The treatment included specific training on using the augmentative system to participate in communication. Once the intervention began, the production of conversation initiations accelerated at a rapid rate. The treatment program was effective in training the subjects to use the augmentative system to increase conversation participation. These results demonstrate that training on the operation of the device alone is not sufficient to ensure improvement in conversation performance, and that it is important to incorporate direct conversational treatment when providing instruction on the use of augmentative communication systems for severely speech-impaired individuals.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 44 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 11%
Professor 4 9%
Researcher 4 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 9%
Other 8 18%
Unknown 14 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 11 25%
Social Sciences 6 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Neuroscience 2 5%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 15 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 January 1994.
All research outputs
#7,495,032
of 22,912,409 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis
#472
of 1,397 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#64,459
of 193,299 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis
#193
of 588 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,912,409 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,397 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 193,299 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 588 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.