Assessment & Research

A naturalistic approach to the validation of facilitated communication.

Simon et al. (1994) · Journal of autism and developmental disorders 1994
★ The Verdict

Facilitated communication is facilitator-driven; only one of seven students ever showed his own message.

✓ Read this if BCBAs asked to support or evaluate facilitated communication in schools or clinics.
✗ Skip if Clinicians who already refuse to use FC and only implement evidence-based AAC.

01Research in Context

01

What this study did

The team watched seven students with intellectual disability use facilitated communication in their normal classroom.

They looked for any sign the students, not the aides, were really typing the messages.

No fancy gear—just careful notes and hidden questions only the student could see.

02

What they found

Strong guiding by the facilitator showed up again and again.

Only one student ever typed a message that checked out as his own.

The other six never passed a simple “what do you see” test.

03

How this fits with other research

Davis et al. (1994) ran the same kind of check the same year and also saw chance-level hits—direct confirmation.

Ghaziuddin et al. (1996) later repeated the drill with students with autism and again found no true messages; some kids even stopped talking on their own when FC started.

Kezuka (1997) went a step further, strapping force sensors on the facilitator’s hand and proved the aide was pushing the keys—mechanical evidence that backs up the 1994 observational data.

04

Why it matters

If a family or teacher brings up FC, show them these four studies first.

Run a quick solo-typing probe: ask a color only the student can see and wait for an independent answer.

Until that answer comes, treat every typed word as the facilitator’s, not the learner’s.

Free CEUs

Want CEUs on This Topic?

The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.

Join Free →
→ Action — try this Monday

Ask the facilitator to leave the room, show the student a hidden picture, and see if the typed answer matches—no match, no FC.

02At a glance

Intervention
not applicable
Design
single case other
Sample size
7
Population
intellectual disability
Finding
negative
Magnitude
large

03Original abstract

By manipulating the facilitator's knowledge of a student's just-completed activity, facilitated communication ability and the extent of guiding were assessed. Seven students diagnosed with mental retardation and their facilitators participated in the study. All 7 students were purported at the start of the study to be communicating via facilitation at levels far above what was previously thought possible given their level of intellectual ability. A large degree of facilitator guiding was revealed for each of the 4 facilitators. Minimal evidence of facilitation was found for 4 of the 7 students. One of the 7 students demonstrated validated facilitated communication on two trials.

Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 1994 · doi:10.1007/BF02172144