The Effects of Symbol Format and Symbol Set on Verb Identification

Abstract

This study examined how symbol format (animated vs. static) and symbol set (Autism Language Program [ALP] vs. Picture Communication Symbols [PCS]) influence verb identification accuracy and symbol format preferences in 5- and 6-year-old children. Sixty-seven typically developing children were randomly assigned to one of four conditions in a 2×2 factorial design. Trials used 16-symbol arrays, with animated conditions containing eight animated and eight static symbols. Format preference was assessed when both formats were present. No 2×2 analysis of variance main effects emerged, but a significant interaction showed that static PCS symbols were identified more accurately than animated PCS. Results indicated that children preferred ALP animations over PCS animations and PCS static symbols over ALP static ones. While animation did not significantly improve overall identification accuracy, ALP animations outperformed PCS animations. Children preferred ALP animations, suggesting these may support symbol transparency and search efficiency in augmentative and alternative communication interventions.

Keywords

animation augmentative and alternative communication graphic symbols

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Allen

A. A.

Schlosser

R. W.

Brock

K. L.

Shane

H. C

. (2017). The effectiveness of aided augmented input techniques for persons with developmental disabilities: A systematic review. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 33(3), 149–159. https://doi.org/10.1080/07434618.2017.1338752

Berney

Bétrancourt

(2016). Does animation enhance learning? A meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 101, 150–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.06.005

Braddick

Birtles

Wattam-Bell

Atkinson

. (2005). Motion- and orientation-specific cortical responses in infancy. Vision Research, 45(25–26), 3169–3179.

Brock

K. L.

Hung

P.-F.

(2021). The effects of digital symbol format on the naming, identification, and sentence production incorporating verbs for individuals with aphasia. Aphasiology, 35(5), 681–703. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687038.2020.1734528

Brock

K. L.

Jenkins

Dukhovny

(2026). The effects of symbol format and symbol placement on identification accuracy. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 42(1), 14–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/07434618.2025.2495901

Brock

Zolkoske

Cummings

Ogiela

D. A

. (2022). The effects of symbol format on receptive syntax outcomes of children without disability. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 65(12), 4741–4760. https://doi.org/10.1044/2022_JSLH R-22-00022

Brown

Thiessen

Beukelman

Hux

(2015). Noun representation in AAC grid displays: Visual attention patterns of people with traumatic brain injury. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 31(1), 15–26. https://doi.org/10.3109/07434618.2014.995224

Choe

Shane

Schlosser

R. W.

Haynes

C. W.

Allen

(2022). Directive-following based on graphic symbol sentences involving an animated verb symbol: An exploratory study. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 43(3), 143–151. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525740120976332

Fenson

Marchman

V. A.

Thal

D. J.

Dale

P. S.

Reznick

J. S.

Bates

. (2007). MacArthur–bates communicative development inventories. Brookes.

10.

Fujisawa

Inoue

Yamana

Hayashi

(2011). The effect of animation on learning action symbols by individuals with intellectual disabilities. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 27(1), 53–60. https://doi.org/10.3109/07434618.2011.553245

11.

Hegarty

Kriz

Cate

(2003). The roles of mental animations and external animations in understanding mechanical systems. Cognition and Instruction, 21(4), 209–249. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci2104_1

12.

Higginbotham

D. J.

Bedrosian

(1995). Subject selection in AAC research: Decision points. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 11(1), 11–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/07434619512331277099

13.

Höffler

T. N.

Leutner

(2007). Instructional animation versus static pictures: A meta-analysis. Learning and Instruction, 17(6), 722–738. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.09.013

14.

Holyfield

(2021). Comparative effects of picture symbol with paired text and text-only augmentative and alternative communication representations on communication from children with autism spectrum disorder. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 30(2), 584–597. https://doi.org/10.1044/2020_AJSLP-20-00099

15.

Jagaroo

Wilkinson

(2008). Further considerations of visual cognitive neuroscience in aided AAC: The potential role of motion perception systems in maximizing design display. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 24(1), 29–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/07434610701390673

16.

Kuperman

Stadthagen-Gonzalez

Brysbaert

(2012). Age-of-acquisition ratings for 30,000 English words. Behavior Research Methods, 44(4), 978–990. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-012-0210-4

17.

Lee

Hong

K.-H.

(2013). The effect of animations on the AAC symbol recognition of children with intellectual disabilities. Special Education, 12(2), 185–202. https://doi.org/10.18541/ser.2013.06.12.2.185

18.

Lloyd

Fuller

(1986). Toward an Augmentative and Alternative Communication symbol taxonomy: A proposed superordinate classification. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 2(4), 165–171. https://doi.org/10.1080/07434618612331273990

19.

Lorang

Maltman

Venker

Eith

Sterling

(2022). Speech-language pathologists’ practices in augmentative and alternative communication during early intervention. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 38(1), 41–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/07434618.2022.2046853

20.

Lowe

R. K.

(2003). Animation and learning: Selective processing of information in dynamic graphics. Learning and Instruction, 13(2), 157–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(02)00018-X

21.

Martin

Brownell

. (2010). Receptive one-word picture vocabulary test–fourth edition. Academic Therapy Publications.

22.

Mirenda

Locke

P. A.

(1989). A comparison of symbol transparency in nonspeaking persons with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 54(2), 131–140. https://doi.org/10.1044/jshd.5402.131

23.

Ploetzner

Berney

Bétrancourt

(2020). A review of learning demands in instructional animations: The educational effectiveness of animations unfolds if the features of change need to be learned. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 36(6), 838–860. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12476

24.

Schlosser

R. W.

Brock

K. L.

Koul

Shane

Flynn

(2019). Does animation facilitate understanding of graphic symbols representing verbs in children with autism spectrum disorder? Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 62(4), 965–978. https://doi.org/10.1044/2018_JSLHR-L-18-0243

25.

Schlosser

R. W.

Koul

Shane

Sorce

Brock

Harmon

Moerlein

Hearn

(2014). Effects of animation on naming and identification across two graphic symbol sets representing verbs and prepositions. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 57(5), 1779–1791. https://doi.org/10.1044/2014_JSLHR-L-13-0193

26.

Schlosser

R. W.

Shane

H. C.

Allen

A. A.

Abramson

Laubscher

Dimery

(2016). Just-in-time supports in augmentative and alternative communication. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 28(1), 177–193. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10882-015-9452-2

27.

Schlosser

R. W.

Shane

Sorce

Koul

Bloomfield

Debrowski

DeLuca

Miller

Schneider

Neff

. (2012). Animation of graphic symbols representing verbs and prepositions: Effects on transparency, name agreement, and identification. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 55(2), 342–358. https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2011/10-0164)

28.

Tobii

Dynavox

. (2026). Picture communication symbols (PCS). https://www.tobiidynavox.com/pages/pcs-picture-communication-symbols

29.

Tversky

Morrison

J. B.

Bétrancourt

(2002). Animation: Can it facilitate? International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 57(4), 247–262. https://doi.org/10.1006/ijhc.2002.1017

30.

Wilkinson

K. M.

Jagaroo

(2004). Contributions of principles of visual cognitive science to AAC system display design. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 20(3), 123–136. https://doi.org/10.1080/07434610410001699717

31.

Wilkinson

K. M.

Light

(2011). Preliminary investigation of visual attention to human figures in photographs: Potential considerations for the design of aided AAC visual scene displays. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 54(6), 1644–1657. https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2011/10-0098)

32.

Wilkinson

K. M.

Madel

(2019). Eye tracking measures reveal how changes in the design of displays for augmentative and alternative communication influence visual search in individuals with Down syndrome or autism spectrum disorder. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 28(4), 1649–1658. https://doi.org/10.1044/2019_AJSLP-19-0006

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.02 MB