Assessment & Research

Selecting a response form for nonverbal persons: Facilitated communication, pointing systems, or sign language?

Sundberg (1993) · The Analysis of verbal behavior 1993
★ The Verdict

Pick sign first for nonverbal clients because its topography lines up cleanly with Skinner’s verbal operants.

✓ Read this if BCBAs choosing an AAC modality for nonverbal clients with autism or ID.
✗ Skip if Teams already committed to an established picture or voice-output system that is working.

01Research in Context

01

What this study did

Palya (1993) compared three ways to give nonverbal people a voice: facilitated communication, pointing boards, and sign language.

The paper is a theory piece, not an experiment. It uses Skinner’s verbal operants to judge each option.

No new data were collected; the author maps how each form fits echoic, mand, tact, and intraverbal units.

02

What they found

Sign language wins the contest. Its hand movements can become true verbal operants under stimulus control.

Facilitated communication fails the test because the facilitator, not the client, may control the response.

Pointing systems sit in the middle—better than FC, but still lack the full range of verbal functions.

03

How this fits with other research

Older single-case studies back the claim. McGee et al. (1983) taught autistic children to sign spontaneous mands that spread across adults and rooms.

Gentry et al. (1980) seemed to disagree: one mute preschooler learned words faster with total communication than with sign alone. The gap closes when you see the child already echoed speech; the target paper urges sign for kids with no echoic repertoire.

Later reviews soften the stance. Gevarter et al. (2013) found no single AAC system beats the rest; they tell you to tailor the tool to the learner. The 1993 paper still matters because it gives you the verbal-behavior checklist to make that match.

04

Why it matters

Use the paper as a quick screen. If the client can move their hands and has no reliable echoic, start with sign. Pair it with speech when echoics emerge, just as Gentry et al. (1980) did. Keep measuring mand, tact, and intraverbal growth to be sure the signs stay under the right stimulus control.

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

Probe five signs tied to strong reinforcers and track whether the client mands under EO control without prompts.

02At a glance

Intervention
not applicable
Design
theoretical
Population
not specified
Finding
not reported

03Original abstract

The three major types of augmentative communication for nonverbal persons consist of writing (or typing), pointing, and signing. These alternative response forms are examined in terms of their advantages and disadvantages for establishing effective verbal behavior. In addition, these systems are examined using the concepts from Skinner's (1957) analysis of verbal behavior (i.e., mand, tact, intraverbal, and autoclitic). The results of this analysis show that sign language has the most advantages and the fewest disadvantages, and more closely parallels speech in terms of the verbal operants. Although, the current trend is to favor facilitated communication (typing) and pointing systems, both of these response forms have several disadvantages that impede the development of the verbal operants. It is suggested that for many nonverbal individuals sign language is a better alternative response form, and has a better chance of improving speech.

The Analysis of verbal behavior, 1993 · doi:10.1007/BF03392891