Alternative receptive language assessment modalities and stimuli for autistic children who are minimally verbal.
Real objects beat picture cards when testing receptive vocabulary in minimally verbal autistic children.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Muller et al. (2022) tested three ways to check receptive vocabulary in minimally verbal autistic kids. They compared real objects, picture cards, and a touchscreen tablet. The kids pointed to the item that matched the word they heard.
All children had autism and used few or no words. The team wanted to see which format showed the child’s true understanding.
What they found
Real objects gave the highest scores. Picture cards gave the lowest. The tablet landed in the middle.
In plain words, the kids looked like they knew more words when they could touch or see the real item.
How this fits with other research
Hartley et al. (2019) seems to disagree. They found no edge for real objects once language levels were matched. The catch: their group had some spoken words. Kristen’s kids had almost none. That explains the clash.
Chen et al. (2024) widen the lens to older, still-minimally-verbal youth. They show the receptive gap keeps growing with age. Kristen’s call to test smarter with real items fits right in.
McGonigle-Chalmers et al. (2013) used a touchscreen to test grammar in non-speaking kids and saw hidden skills. Kristen adds that even within screens, real objects still win for simple word checks.
Why it matters
If you test with picture cards, you may mark a child as not knowing a word they actually know. Swap the cards for the real cookie, shoe, or toy car and you could see a jump in correct answers. Use this quick change during intake, re-eval, or before setting new goals to get a fairer picture of what the child understands.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Replace picture cards with the real item during the next receptive ID probe and record any score change.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
It is difficult to measure language comprehension abilities in autistic children who have limited expressive language skills. Results from available assessments may underestimate autistic children's receptive language skills. The primary purpose of this study was to compare alternative modalities and stimuli used to measure receptive vocabulary skills in autistic children who are minimally verbal. This study compared participants' outcomes on three different receptive vocabulary assessment conditions: an assessment that used a low-tech stimulus book, a touchscreen assessment, and an assessment that used real-object stimuli. Twenty-seven students between the ages of 3 and 12 who had minimal verbal skills and a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder participated in this study. Results showed that participants' scores in the real-object assessment condition were significantly higher than in the low-tech condition and marginally higher than scores in the touchscreen condition. These results suggest real-object stimuli may provide a more robust measure of autistic children's receptive vocabulary skills than traditional low-tech picture stimuli. Although many direct standardized assessments use picture stimuli to measure word understanding, when assessing autistic individuals who have limited expressive language, real objects can be used in replacement of, or in addition to, picture stimuli.
Autism : the international journal of research and practice, 2022 · doi:10.1177/13623613211065225