A systematic review of the comparative pragmatic differences in conversational skills of individuals with autism

IF 2.5 Q1 EDUCATION, SPECIAL Autism and Developmental Language Impairments Pub Date : 2018-09-01 DOI:10.1177/2396941518803806
Cheong Ying Sng, M. Carter, J. Stephenson
{"title":"A systematic review of the comparative pragmatic differences in conversational skills of individuals with autism","authors":"Cheong Ying Sng, M. Carter, J. Stephenson","doi":"10.1177/2396941518803806","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background and aims: Given that problems with social interaction and communication are defining features of autism spectrum disorder, it stands to reason that individuals with autism spectrum disorder have difficulties in conversation. There is a growing body of research on the conversation skills of individuals with autism spectrum disorder, including research conducted to compare these skills to those of typically developing individuals and those with other disabilities. Such comparisons may offer insight into the extent to which conversational skills may be deficient and whether deficits are unique to a particular diagnostic group. Main contribution: This review provides an examination of comparative studies of pragmatic aspects of conversation that included individuals with autism spectrum disorder. Only a small number of consistent findings emerged from the analysis. Groups with autism spectrum disorder find it difficult to stay on topic and provide novel, relevant information. They also tend to perseverate more and initiate and respond less during conversation but, contrary to expectation, similar numbers of turns were offered to partners, and there was little difference in the way communication breakdowns were repaired or clarified. There was a contradictory finding on the use of eye gaze. Conclusions and implications: Some consistent findings were reported but overall, fewer than expected between group differences were found. The fragmented nature of the research and inconsistent operational definitions of variables measured made analysis problematic. Further research and replication of studies is recommended before definitive conclusions can be drawn.","PeriodicalId":36716,"journal":{"name":"Autism and Developmental Language Impairments","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2018-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/2396941518803806","citationCount":"41","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Autism and Developmental Language Impairments","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2396941518803806","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 41

Abstract

Background and aims: Given that problems with social interaction and communication are defining features of autism spectrum disorder, it stands to reason that individuals with autism spectrum disorder have difficulties in conversation. There is a growing body of research on the conversation skills of individuals with autism spectrum disorder, including research conducted to compare these skills to those of typically developing individuals and those with other disabilities. Such comparisons may offer insight into the extent to which conversational skills may be deficient and whether deficits are unique to a particular diagnostic group. Main contribution: This review provides an examination of comparative studies of pragmatic aspects of conversation that included individuals with autism spectrum disorder. Only a small number of consistent findings emerged from the analysis. Groups with autism spectrum disorder find it difficult to stay on topic and provide novel, relevant information. They also tend to perseverate more and initiate and respond less during conversation but, contrary to expectation, similar numbers of turns were offered to partners, and there was little difference in the way communication breakdowns were repaired or clarified. There was a contradictory finding on the use of eye gaze. Conclusions and implications: Some consistent findings were reported but overall, fewer than expected between group differences were found. The fragmented nature of the research and inconsistent operational definitions of variables measured made analysis problematic. Further research and replication of studies is recommended before definitive conclusions can be drawn.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
自闭症患者会话技能比较语用差异的系统评价
背景和目的:鉴于社交和沟通问题是自闭症谱系障碍的特征,自闭症谱系疾病患者在对话中存在困难是理所当然的。越来越多的研究对自闭症谱系障碍患者的谈话技能进行了研究,包括将这些技能与典型的发育中个体和其他残疾者的对话技能进行比较。这样的比较可以深入了解会话技能的缺陷程度,以及缺陷是否是特定诊断组特有的。主要贡献:这篇综述对谈话的语用方面进行了比较研究,其中包括自闭症谱系障碍患者。分析中只有少量一致的发现。患有自闭症谱系障碍的群体发现很难专注于主题并提供新颖、相关的信息。他们在谈话中也倾向于更多地坚持,更少地主动和回应,但与预期相反,向伴侣提供的轮次数量相似,在修复或澄清沟通障碍的方式上几乎没有差异。关于眼睛凝视的使用,有一个矛盾的发现。结论和意义:报告了一些一致的发现,但总体而言,发现的组间差异小于预期。研究的分散性和测量变量的操作定义不一致,使得分析存在问题。在得出明确结论之前,建议进行进一步的研究和重复研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Autism and Developmental Language Impairments
Autism and Developmental Language Impairments Psychology-Clinical Psychology
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Teachers' use of augmented input and responsive strategies in schools for students with intellectual disability: A multiple case study of a communication partner intervention. Early development score as a prognostic factor in nonverbal/minimally verbal children with autism spectrum disorder: A matched case-control study in Cyprus. Normal but Different: Autistic Adolescents Who Score Within Normal Ranges on Standardized Language Tests Produce Frequent Linguistic Irregularities in Spontaneous Discourse. "I need them for my autism, but I don't know why": Exploring the friendship experiences of autistic children in UK primary schools. How do children with language disorder perceive their peer interactions? A qualitative investigation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1