The Development and Feasibility Study of a Multimodal 'Talking Wall' to Facilitate the Voice of Young People with Autism and Complex Needs: A Case Study in a Specialist Residential School.
Norah Richards, Laura Crane
PMID 32270384WHAT IT FOUND
Ten minimally verbal or complex-needs students used a multimodal 'Talking Wall' to express preferences.
While staff found it promising for capturing immediate likes, spontaneous use was absent, and students often matched images rather than expressing true feelings, especially regarding negative emotions.
Key findings
01There was no spontaneous independent use of the wall by the young people during the observation period.
02All observed incidences of using the wall were generated after positive experiences, with only one reported instance of posting a negative emotion.
03Staff struggled to distinguish between true communicative intent and the students' learned behaviour of matching images to schedules.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat 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 was small (10 students) and conducted in a single specialist setting, limiting generalisability. The researcher was an employee of the school, which introduces potential bias in observation and interpretation. The pilot period was short (six months), insufficient for the intervention to become embedded in daily routines. Students were passive participants (observed) rather than active co-researchers, potentially missing their own perspectives on the method.
Declared interests
The lead researcher was an employee of the school where the study took place. The second author was an independent academic researcher. No external funding or commercial conflicts are reported.
The easy way to misread this
Do not assume that placing an object on the wall indicates a student's true preference. The study found that students often matched images as part of their learned routine, and staff could not reliably distinguish this from genuine expression of intent.