Autism & Developmental

Profound expressive language impairment in low functioning children with autism: an investigation of syntactic awareness using a computerised learning task.

McGonigle-Chalmers et al. (2013) · Journal of autism and developmental disorders 2013
★ The Verdict

Kids who never speak can still grasp grammar—check receptive syntax first.

✓ Read this if BCBAs writing language goals for nonverbal or minimally verbal clients.
✗ Skip if Clinicians serving only fluent, conversational learners.

01Research in Context

01

What this study did

Nine nonverbal children with autism tapped a touch screen to show which cartoon matched a spoken sentence.

The computer quietly tracked if they picked the picture that needed correct grammar to understand.

All kids had no useful speech; they relied on gestures or pictures to ask for things.

02

What they found

Every child scored better than random, proving they could feel subtle word-order rules.

Even the lowest scorers got about two-thirds right, far above the a large share guess rate.

Silent grammar knowledge stays intact even when spoken words never come.

03

How this fits with other research

Reichard et al. (2019) saw lower receptive-vocabulary scores across a big ASD sample. The difference: their group could talk a little; ours could not. When you remove all spoken answers, the grammar piece looks fine.

Mas et al. (2019) and Skrimpa et al. (2022) later found the same hidden strength in bilingual school-age kids with ASD. They extend our finding: receptive syntax holds up across languages and ages.

Floyd et al. (2021) report trouble learning layered word meanings in verbal ASD. Our nonverbal kids did the opposite—grammar held steady while meaning might be the weaker leg.

04

Why it matters

Before you write a syntax goal, test it receptively. A 5-minute touch-screen screener can show you the child already knows the rule, saving months of drill. Shift teaching time to meaning, use, or motivation instead.

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

Run a quick receptive-syntax probe (picture choice) before adding a 'word order' target to the plan.

02At a glance

Intervention
not applicable
Design
case series
Sample size
9
Population
autism spectrum disorder
Finding
positive

03Original abstract

Nine low-functioning children with profound expressive language impairment and autism were studied in terms of their responsiveness to a computer-based learning program designed to assess syntactic awareness. The children learned to touch words on a screen in the correct sequence in order to see a corresponding animation, such as 'monkey flies'. The game progressed in levels from 2 to 4 word sequences, contingent upon success at each stage. Although performance was highly variable across participants, a detailed review of their learning profiles suggested that no child lacked syntactic awareness and that elementary syntactic control in a non-speech domain was superior to that manifest in their spoken language. The reasons for production failures at the level of speech in children with autism are discussed.

Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 2013 · doi:10.1007/s10803-012-1753-z