Cargando…

Evidence of Authorship on Messages in Facilitated Communication: A Case Report Using Accelerometry

Facilitated communication (FC) belongs to augmentative and alternative methods of communication. Currently, FC is very rarely and unofficially used with people suffering from verbal/communicative disorders or neurodevelopmental disorders such as intellectual deficiency or autism spectrum disorder (A...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Faure, Patrick, Legou, Thierry, Gepner, Bruno
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7840699/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33519537
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2020.543385
_version_ 1783643635529547776
author Faure, Patrick
Legou, Thierry
Gepner, Bruno
author_facet Faure, Patrick
Legou, Thierry
Gepner, Bruno
author_sort Faure, Patrick
collection PubMed
description Facilitated communication (FC) belongs to augmentative and alternative methods of communication. Currently, FC is very rarely and unofficially used with people suffering from verbal/communicative disorders or neurodevelopmental disorders such as intellectual deficiency or autism spectrum disorder (ASD). FC consists of physical support exerted by a facilitator at the hand/wrist/forearm/elbow of a patient/participant, aimed at helping him/her to point at pictures/words, and sometimes to type letters/words on a keyboard. Given most of (but not all) validation studies using control procedures failed to confirm that ASD participants themselves were authoring the messages via FC, this method has been massively disputed and rejected. However, firm and definitive conclusions for/against the validity of FC requires more robust demonstrations, particularly when considering the motor participation of both protagonists. We present here a case report investigating the motor contribution of both protagonists during a typing process using the non-invasive technique of accelerometry. A 17-year-old boy diagnosed with congenital deafness, ASD, and developmental delay, and his facilitator, were equipped with small accelerometers fixed on their index finger, aimed at transforming index acceleration along the three spatial axes into electric signals. Typing on a PC keyboard was performed under three support conditions: hand support, forearm support, elbow support, plus a solo-typing condition. Accelerometric signals and video data were recorded during four FC sessions. We measured and compared the typing speed, the number/percentage of acceleration peaks produced by the participant or by the facilitator first, and those of “signal under detection threshold” in the facilitator, the time offset between acceleration peaks of both protagonists, and the difference of the amount of acceleration between them, across the different support conditions. Results indicate that in the hand support, most of the time, acceleration motions of the participant's index finger preceded those of the facilitator's index finger. Then, the more distal the physical support (i.e., farer from the participant's hand), the slower the speed of typing, the higher the percentage of “signal under detection threshold” in the facilitator, the bigger the motor contribution from the participant. Altogether, in all the support conditions, the participant's authorship or, at least, co-authorship on the messages seems warranted. Finally, accelerometry seems relevant to objectivize authorship or co-authorship in FC and delineate various forms of FC.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7840699
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78406992021-01-29 Evidence of Authorship on Messages in Facilitated Communication: A Case Report Using Accelerometry Faure, Patrick Legou, Thierry Gepner, Bruno Front Psychiatry Psychiatry Facilitated communication (FC) belongs to augmentative and alternative methods of communication. Currently, FC is very rarely and unofficially used with people suffering from verbal/communicative disorders or neurodevelopmental disorders such as intellectual deficiency or autism spectrum disorder (ASD). FC consists of physical support exerted by a facilitator at the hand/wrist/forearm/elbow of a patient/participant, aimed at helping him/her to point at pictures/words, and sometimes to type letters/words on a keyboard. Given most of (but not all) validation studies using control procedures failed to confirm that ASD participants themselves were authoring the messages via FC, this method has been massively disputed and rejected. However, firm and definitive conclusions for/against the validity of FC requires more robust demonstrations, particularly when considering the motor participation of both protagonists. We present here a case report investigating the motor contribution of both protagonists during a typing process using the non-invasive technique of accelerometry. A 17-year-old boy diagnosed with congenital deafness, ASD, and developmental delay, and his facilitator, were equipped with small accelerometers fixed on their index finger, aimed at transforming index acceleration along the three spatial axes into electric signals. Typing on a PC keyboard was performed under three support conditions: hand support, forearm support, elbow support, plus a solo-typing condition. Accelerometric signals and video data were recorded during four FC sessions. We measured and compared the typing speed, the number/percentage of acceleration peaks produced by the participant or by the facilitator first, and those of “signal under detection threshold” in the facilitator, the time offset between acceleration peaks of both protagonists, and the difference of the amount of acceleration between them, across the different support conditions. Results indicate that in the hand support, most of the time, acceleration motions of the participant's index finger preceded those of the facilitator's index finger. Then, the more distal the physical support (i.e., farer from the participant's hand), the slower the speed of typing, the higher the percentage of “signal under detection threshold” in the facilitator, the bigger the motor contribution from the participant. Altogether, in all the support conditions, the participant's authorship or, at least, co-authorship on the messages seems warranted. Finally, accelerometry seems relevant to objectivize authorship or co-authorship in FC and delineate various forms of FC. Frontiers Media S.A. 2021-01-14 /pmc/articles/PMC7840699/ /pubmed/33519537 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2020.543385 Text en Copyright © 2021 Faure, Legou and Gepner. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Psychiatry
Faure, Patrick
Legou, Thierry
Gepner, Bruno
Evidence of Authorship on Messages in Facilitated Communication: A Case Report Using Accelerometry
title Evidence of Authorship on Messages in Facilitated Communication: A Case Report Using Accelerometry
title_full Evidence of Authorship on Messages in Facilitated Communication: A Case Report Using Accelerometry
title_fullStr Evidence of Authorship on Messages in Facilitated Communication: A Case Report Using Accelerometry
title_full_unstemmed Evidence of Authorship on Messages in Facilitated Communication: A Case Report Using Accelerometry
title_short Evidence of Authorship on Messages in Facilitated Communication: A Case Report Using Accelerometry
title_sort evidence of authorship on messages in facilitated communication: a case report using accelerometry
topic Psychiatry
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7840699/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33519537
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2020.543385
work_keys_str_mv AT faurepatrick evidenceofauthorshiponmessagesinfacilitatedcommunicationacasereportusingaccelerometry
AT legouthierry evidenceofauthorshiponmessagesinfacilitatedcommunicationacasereportusingaccelerometry
AT gepnerbruno evidenceofauthorshiponmessagesinfacilitatedcommunicationacasereportusingaccelerometry