Comparison of correct responses and response latency for fixed and dynamic displays: Performance of a learner with severe developmental disabilities

Joe Reichle, Elizabeth E. Dettling, Kathryn D R Drager, Ann Leiter

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

16 Scopus citations

Abstract

The relative efficiency of three types of graphic symbol displays was examined for an experienced augmentative system user. The learner matched photographs to symbols in displays that included fixed (all symbols appearing on one page), dynamic active (each symbol on one page electronically linked to a second page), and dynamic passive (two pages of symbols linked by a `go to' symbol). Accuracy and response time were measures used to determine if one type of symbol display was easier to learn and/or use than another. Response time was the fastest and accuracy was the greatest for the fixed and dynamic active display types. Differences between the three display types became more apparent after the addition of distractor symbols. The limitations of the findings of this single participant investigation are discussed along with implications for future research.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)154-163
Number of pages10
JournalAAC: Augmentative and Alternative Communication
Volume16
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2000

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Rehabilitation
  • Speech and Hearing

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of correct responses and response latency for fixed and dynamic displays: Performance of a learner with severe developmental disabilities'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this