Reconciling communication repertoires: navigating interactions involving persons with severe/profound intellectual disability, a classic grounded theory study.
A-M Martin, T Andrews, J Goldbart and 1 others
PMID 35194869WHAT IT FOUND
Interactions often continue without understanding to nurture belonging.
Partners adjust their communication style to match the person's repertoire. Routine activities and predictable conversations are most effective. Subtle hints or multi-messaging cause confusion. Effort and time constraints frequently limit interaction frequency.
Key findings
01The primary motivation for interacting is nurturing a sense of belonging, which can persist even when mutual understanding is not achieved.
02Successful communication requires reconciling repertoires, where partners with wider skills adapt to those with narrower abilities, often through routine and predictable interactions.
03High effort demands and time constraints frequently lead to shorter, less frequent interactions or resignation from the interaction.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTsWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study included only three individuals with severe/profound ID, limiting the diversity of experiences represented. The theory is substantive and not claimed to be generalisable to all people with severe/profound ID. Proxy consent was used for the participants with ID, which raises questions about autonomy and potential bias, although assent behaviours were monitored. The unit of analysis was behaviour, not individual perspective, meaning personal interpretations of the participants with ID were not captured directly.
Declared interests
No external funding was received. No conflicts of interest were declared.
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret the continuation of interaction as evidence of successful communication or understanding. The study found that partners often acquiesce to misunderstandings to maintain a sense of belonging, meaning an interaction can appear positive while remaining fundamentally unclear.