Assessment & Research

Speech-generating devices versus manual signing for children with developmental disabilities.

van der Meer et al. (2012) · Research in developmental disabilities 2012
★ The Verdict

Let the child choose: SGD or signing; the preferred mode cuts teaching time in half.

✓ Read this if BCBAs teaching first requests to non-verbal kids in clinic or preschool.
✗ Skip if Teams already using robust AAC with fluent users.

01Research in Context

01

What this study did

Four kids with developmental delay learned to ask for toys two ways: tapping a picture on an iPod that spoke the word, or using sign language. The team used a multiple-baseline design. They tracked how fast each child could request a toy during playtime.

02

What they found

All four kids learned to ask faster with the speech-generating device. Three kids kept asking with the iPod weeks later. One child liked signing better and kept using signs. The kids stuck with the method they liked most.

03

How this fits with other research

Kassardjian et al. (2014) updated an older Social Story method. They showed kids learn social skills faster when you teach with short lessons, demo, and practice. van der Meer et al. (2012) does the same update for AAC: SGD beats manual signing for speed.

Camilleri et al. (2024) took the idea into the digital world. Their app-based Social Stories work best for younger verbal kids and autistic girls. It extends the 2012 finding that tech can outdo low-tech options.

Cramm et al. (2009) found paper Social Stories still help some kids. The papers do not clash. The 2012 study just shows SGD works quicker for requesting, while Social Stories target different social skills.

04

Why it matters

Before you pick signing or an iPad voice, test which one the child likes. Run a quick preference assessment. Use the winner first to build early requesting. Faster acquisition means fewer frustrated moments and more reinforcement for everyone.

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

Put two icons on the table—one for iPad voice, one for sign—and see which the child reaches for first.

02At a glance

Intervention
augmentative alternative communication
Design
multiple baseline across participants
Sample size
4
Population
developmental delay
Finding
positive
Magnitude
medium

03Original abstract

We compared speed of acquisition and preference for using a speech-generating device (SGD) versus manual signing (MS) as augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) options. Four children with developmental disabilities (DD), aged 5-10 years, were taught to request preferred objects using an iPod(®)-based SGD and MS. Intervention was introduced in a multiple-probe across participants design and SGD and MS conditions were compared in an alternating treatments design. A systematic choice-making paradigm was implemented to determine if the children showed a preference for using SGD or MS. All participants showed increased use of SGD when intervention was introduced, but only three learned under the MS condition. Three participants exhibited a preference for the SGD while the remaining participant demonstrated a preference for using MS. Results support previous studies showing that individuals with DD often show a preference for different AAC options and extend previous data by suggesting that acquisition and maintenance was better for the preferred option.

Research in developmental disabilities, 2012 · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2012.04.004