This article originally appeared in Vol. 2 No. 4 (Aug. 1994) of th Facilitated Communication Digest, [pp. 3-4].

RESEARCH BRIEF: PRELIMINARY RESULTS OF A VALIDATION STUDY REGARDING FACILITATED COMMUNICATION

Donald N. Cardinal
Chapman University
Darlene Hanson
Whittier Union High School
The validation study presented here has been developed over the past 15 months. The purpose of the study was to learn more about why FC speakers were having difficulty passing messages to "blind" facilitators as was reported in several published studies. The data presented below are considered "preliminary" in that some sessions for some subjects have yet to be entered into the data set, although it is currently about 90% complete. The researcher believes the addition of the final 10% of the data will not significantly differ from what is presented here. The data are also considered preliminary in that only the main results are presented.

Background

The study's protocol was developed using collaborative action research. In this case that means that several school and university professionals observed students using FC for hundreds of hours within the classroom, collaborated on those observations, developed "mini" protocols, tested those protocols under quasi-experimental conditions, collaborated again regarding the results, redesigned the protocol, re-tested the protocol, etc. The purpose of this process was to develop elements of a procedure that served to capture facilitated communication rather than suppress it.

Protocol

The protocol used for this study was designed to be statistically experimental, sensitive to elements that may affect the students' ability under the prescribed conditions, as simple as possible, and able to be replicated in whole or part by others for future studies. The protocol is as follows: 1) the student was shown a word on a flash card by a "recorder," 2) the recorder asked the facilitator to come into the room, 3) the facilitator asked the student to type the word to which the student was introduced, 4) the facilitator said the letters aloud as the student typed them and the recorder wrote those letters on the data sheet exactly as heard, 5) the student was always given the same positive comment regardless of a correct or incorrect response, the facilitator left the room and the recorder introduced a second word and the process repeated.

Other important protocol conditions were: baseline data was gathered on each subject without the use of FC prior to the beginning of the study and again six weeks later; the correctness of the answer was determined at a later time by a graduate assistant; all data sheets were picked up each week; there were 100 different words available and there were never more than 90 trials per student so most students never had a repeat word; each student was "tested" three times per week for six weeks; each test session consisted of five trials; in all but five cases the student's baseline was zero and it was one in those five cases.

Results

Only the most basic results of this study are presented here. There was a total of 43 subjects ranging in age from 11 to 22 years of age. The diagnoses ranged from autism to mental retardation to other developmental disabilities. Forty-eight percent of the students were able to pass information correctly to a blind facilitator at least 2 of the 5 times during a session by the end of the six weeks. Thirty-three percent were able to pass information correctly at least 3 of the 5 times. (A "correct" response was a perfectly spelled word with no extra letters.)

Discussion

This study does not prove the validity of FC but it does suggest that protocols of past studies may have served to suppress message passing abilities. This study also sets forth the most basic argument regarding the validation of FC; that given "ideal" conditions a person using FC who has previously demonstrated that sh/e cannot pass a message to a blind facilitator can do so under proper conditions. Finally, this study supports the notion that a facilitator-user pair can generate output that is completely originated by the FC user.

The next step will be to develop a protocol that asks the subject to pass information requiring a higher form of cognition - some studies are already under way but many more are needed. The so-called ability to pass information with FC is viewed by these researchers as very fragile; it is likely that one subject may pass a test under one set of conditions and not under an- other. In fact, the message passing capabilities of a person using FC appear to be variable not only to environmental conditions but also to a priori training of the test conditions as well.


Return to Facilitated Communication Digest main index.
Return to Facilitated Communication Institute homepage.