Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 2012 Feb;21(1):16-28.
doi: 10.1044/1058-0360(2011/10-0099). Epub 2011 Nov 2.

Development of the communication complexity scale

Nancy C Brady  1 , Kandace Fleming, Kathy Thiemann-Bourque, Lesley Olswang, Patricia Dowden, Muriel D Saunders, Janet Marquis
Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Development of the communication complexity scale

Nancy C Brady et al. Am J Speech Lang Pathol. 2012 Feb.

Abstract

Purpose: Accurate description of an individual's communication status is critical in both research and practice. Describing the communication status of individuals with severe intellectual and developmental disabilities is difficult because these individuals often communicate with presymbolic means that may not be readily recognized. Our goal was to design a communication scale and summary score for interpretation that could be applied across populations of children and adults with limited (often presymbolic) communication forms.

Method: The Communication Complexity Scale (CCS) was developed by a team of researchers and tested with 178 participants with varying levels of presymbolic and early symbolic communication skills. Correlations between standardized and informant measures were completed, and expert opinions were obtained regarding the CCS.

Results: CCS scores were within expected ranges for the populations studied, and interrater reliability was high. Comparison across other measures indicated significant correlations with standardized tests of language. Scores on informant report measures tended to place children at higher levels of communication. Expert opinions generally favored the development of the CCS.

Conclusions: The scale appears to be useful for describing a given individual's level of presymbolic or early symbolic communication. Further research is needed to determine whether it is sensitive to developmental growth in communication.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Abbeduto L, Warren S, Conners F. Language development in Down syndrome: From the prelinguistic period to the acquisition of literacy. Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research Review. 2007;13:247–261. - PubMed
    1. Adamson L, Chance S. Coordinating attention to people, objects, and language. In: Wetherby A, Warren S, Reichle J, editors. Tranisitions in prelinguistic communication. Brookes Publishing Company; Baltimore: 1998. pp. 15–39.
    1. Anderson D, Lord C, Risi S, diLavore P, Shulman C, Thurm A, Wech K, Pickles A. Patterns of growth in verbal abilities among children with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 2007;75:594–604. - PubMed
    1. Baldwin DA. Understanding the link between joint attention and language. In: Moore C, Dunham PJ, editors. Joint attention: Its origins and role in development. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; Hillsdale, NJ: 1995. pp. 131–159.
    1. Bates E, Benigni L, Bretherton I, Camaioni L, Volterra V. The emergence of symbols: Cognition and communication in infancy. Academic Press; New York: 1979.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources