In Australia there are few augmented communicators in full time open employment. This study investigated the topics and vocabulary of meal break conversations between six employees who are augmented communicators and their natural speaking work colleagues. The augmented communicators all used devices that relied on spelling for message construction. The implications of this study for future services to augmented communicators will be discussed.

Despite the fact that work is regarded as one of the most important ways in which an adult can contribute to and participate in society (Lakin, Hayden, & Abery, 1994; Storey, H., & Lengyel, 1995), the employment rate for individuals with a severe communication impairment (S CI) is significantly lower than that of the general population (LaPlante, 1993). Blackstone (1993) noted that there is a dearth of research focusing on adults who use augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) in community based employment, yet communication has been designated a work related issue that must be addressed for students with physical and multiple disabilities embarking on vocational training programs (Carlson, 1994; Sowers & Powers, 1991).

If successful interactions between employees using AAC and their natural speaking co-workers are to take place at work, augmented communicators must have an adequate means of communication and access to relevant vocabulary (Creech, 1994; Ylvisaker, Urbanczyk, & Feeney, 1992). Augmented communicators have suggested that their own communication must be exemplary if they are to obtain and keep a job (Callahan, 1993; Creech, 1993), and have recounted instances when they believed they were not successful because they used an augmented communication system (Williams, 1993). Recent studies of conversations at work in Australia (Balandin, 1995; Balandin & Iacono, in press-a; Balandin & Iacono, in press-b) have indicated that it is possible to identify words and topics that occur frequently in mealbreak conversations. In fact it has been argued that five topics account for at least 58% of the meal break conversation on any given day of the week (Balandin, 1995; Balandin & Iacono, in press-a; Balandin & Iacono, in press-b). Balandin and Iacono (in press-a) also suggested that professionals may not be skilled in selecting topics and vocabulary that will be relevant to the meal break conversation. Balandin (1995) also suggested that vocabulary for social interactions at work may contain slang and specific words that are important within the work context. She argued that augmented communicators may benefit from access to such vocabulary if they wish to ‘fit in’ with their work colleagues. Consequently, she recommended that considerable care should be taken in selecting useful vocabulary for the work situation and suggested that the augmented communicator be actively involved in the vocabulary selection procedure, and that efforts be made to check that the vocabulary selected is actually useful.

The aim of the present study was to extend the findings of Balandin’s (1995) original study and investigate the topics and vocabulary used by augmented communicators during meal break conversations at work.

Method

Six augmented communicators, four females and two males, agreed to participate in the project. Four of the participants preferred to use their own speech if possible and used their communication devices to support their spoken communication if they were not understood. Two of the participants never used speech , but both used vocalizations, facial expression, laughter, gesture and body movements to express themselves. One participant used signs with friends familiar with sign language.

Communication devices used included LightwritersTM, a TouchtalkerTM, and a Real VoiceTM.

An omnidirectional, low impedance 50-15000 Hz response RealisticTM tie pin microphone and a voice activated RQ - L340 PanasonicTM mini cassette recorder were used to record each participant’s conversations.

Participants wore the recorders for 15 minutes during their morning tea break, after which time the recording equipment was removed. The participants were instructed not to touch the recorders and not to feel obliged to create artificial conversations for the sake of the research. They were reminded that confidentiality would be maintained. The investigator was not present in the room during the recording.

Data Transcription and Analysis

Daily conversation samples Each daily recorded conversation sample was transcribed into WordPerfectTM (Version 3) for a MacintoshTM computer. The samples were typed verbatim according to a predetermined set of transcription rules similar to those utilised by Stuart et al. (1993). Filler words (e.g. "er", "oh", "ah", "mm") were typed orthographically and the total sample was analysed for typographical errors using the spellcheck tool on the word processing program.

Analysis of the weekday topics. The procedure for topic analysis was based on procedures discussed in the literature (e.g by Balandin & Iacono, in press; Bedrosian, 1993; Stuart, et al., 1993).

Analysis of vocabulary. The vocabulary was analysed using the Vocabulary Frequency Analyser (Tice, 1989). Based on previous research (Balandin, 1995; Balandin & Iacono, 1997; Stuart et at, 1993), words occurring with a frequency of .5 per 1000 or higher were considered the core (most frequently used) vocabulary. All other words were designated fringe vocabulary.

Results

The participants referenced 47 different topics. A total of 66% of all topic reference was a single word message that was expanded or understood as a whole phrase by the natural speaking partners, for example

Augmented Communicator "Tickets"

Natural speaking communication partner (Co-worker) "Did you send the tickets?"

The augmented communicators referenced the present tense most frequently and made frequent reference to themselves. Four topics accounted for 82% of the total topic reference. The 12 most frequently referenced topics are contained in Table 1.

Table 1

The 12 Most Frequently Referenced Topics

The participants used a total of 2,136 words of which 365 were unique or different (i.e., the sample consisted of 365 different words, many of which occurred more than once). A total of 225 unique words made up the augmented communicators’ core vocabulary (Appendix A). This vocabulary accounted for 70% of the total word use. Comparison of the core vocabulary with Balandin’s (1995) core vocabulary indicated that 143 words were common to both lists. The augmented communicators’ used a small fringe vocabulary of 140 words.

Discussion

The topics used by the participants in this study did not differ greatly from those used by natural speakers in Balandin’s (1995) study although the augmented communicators referenced fewer topics. However, the augmented communicators frequently used utterances that it was not possible to categorize code as a topic. Although these utterances were not in themselves topics, they were references to the topic of conversation which suggests that programmed topic vocabulary may not be necessary for augmented communicators who can spell providing they have the social skills to interact with their natural speaking peers.

The results indicated that there is a small core vocabulary that could usefully be programmed into communication devices that will be used for general conversations. Research into acceleration vocabularies has suggested that frequency of occurrence is more important than word length in saving time and energy (Vanderheiden & Kelso, 1987). However, it should be noted that core vocabularies may ouly be useful to augmented communicators who are using full sentences. Therefore, they may be more useful in written rather than spoken communicative contexts.

Fringe Vocabulary

The small size of the fringe vocabulary was surprising. All the participants were highly competent communicators, yet they rarely used long sentences and frequently relied on one or two word utterances to express their messages. These results call into question the practice of setting up communication systems in a sentence format and of encouraging young augmented communicators to converse in full sentences when practicing conversational skills. It is of course important that augmented communicators have a good understanding of grammatical syntax, nevertheless casual conversations or chats, may not be the best context in which to practice these skills. This study supports the belief that a competent communicator is one who can maintain a conversation using a variety of communication modes, including gesture, vocalizations, and facial expression. Unfortunately it was beyond the scope of this study to analyze the additional communication modes used by the participants. However, it was clear from the conversational samples that single words were used not only to express ideas, but also as confirmation, emphasis, and turn taking strategies. It was also clear that the natural speakers often used repetition of single word messages to clarify the conversational drift and to elicit more information.

Implications for AAC

The participants in this study were a select group. There are very few augmented communicators currently working in open employment in Australia This may mean that they are not ‘typical’ of Australian augmented communicators. They are however, very successful communicators. The results of the present study call in to question the belief that breaks in the work context provide opportunities for socialization. Breaks were not taken regularly by the participants under ‘non research’ conditions and at least two of the participants were unable to eat, drink, and converse during a meal break.

The results also underline the importance of nonverbal communication in socialization and the value of natural speech (even if difficult to comprehend by others). Speech pathologists, carers, and service providers should be sensitive in providing augmented communicators with strategies to assist them make optimal use of their own speech and vocalizations.

None of the participants expressed any enthusiasm for having vocabulary preprogrammed into their devices. This may have been because they were all competent spellers and able to generate and maintain conversations with relative ease.

Conclusions

This results of this study suggest that the vocabulary used by augmented communicators during meal break conversations in the work force may differ from those of natural speakers. Consequently, it may not be advisable to suggest that a vocabulary used by natural speakers will best suit augmented communicators in a similar situation. It may be time to cease endeavoring to promote communication similar to natural speech for augmented communicators’ social interactions. Rather, it is now time to examine the context and culture of augmented communicators considered successful by their peers, in order to learn from them what strategies and communication techniques are important for positive social interaction.

References

Balandin, 5. (1995). The topics and vocabulary of mealbreak conversations. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Macquarie University. Sydney.

Balandin, S., & lacono, T. (1997). Crews, wusses, and whoppas: The core and fringe vocabulary of Australian mealtime conversations. Manuscript submitted for publication.

Balandin, S., & Iacono, T. (in press-a). A few well chosen words. Augmentative and Alternative Communication.

Balandin, S., & Dacono, T. (in press-b). The topics of meal break conversations.

Callahan, M. (1993, ). Daily issues on the job from actual situations. Paper presented at the Pittsburgh Employment Conference, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

Carlson, F. (1994, ). How can you expect to get a job if you don’t start in pre-school? Paper presented at the Pittsburgh Employment Conference, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

Creech, R. (1993, ). Productive employment for augmentative communicators. Paper presented at the Pittsburgh Employment Conference, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

Creech, R. D. (1994,). Practical problems of employment: A personal view. Paper presented at the Pittsburgh Employment Conference, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

Laldn, K. C., Hayden, M. F., & Abery, B. H. (1994). An overview of the community living concept. In M. F. Hayden & B. H. Abery (Eds.), Challenges for a service system in transition (pp. 3-22). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.

LaPlante, M. P. (1993, ). Estimating the size of the speech-impaired population, use of speech aids and employment patterns. Paper presented at the Pittsburgh Employment Conference, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

Sowers, J., & Powers, P. (1991). Vocational preparation and employment of students with physical and multiple disabilities. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.

Storey, K., H., E., & Lengyel, L. (1995). Communication strategies for increasing the integration of persons in supported employment: A review. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 4(2), 45-54.

Stuart, S., Vanderhoof, D., & Beukelman, D. R. (1993). Topic and vocabulary use patterns of elderly women. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 9(2),95-118.

Tice, R. (1989). Vocabulary Frequency Analyser. Lincoln Nebraska: University of Lincoln-Nebraska.

Vanderheiden, G. C., & Kelso, D. P. (1987). Comparative analysis of fixed-vocabulary communication acceleration techniques. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 3(4), 196-206.

Williams, M. B. (1993,). My first job interview. Paper presented at the Pittsburgh Employment Conference, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

Ylvisaker, M., Urbanczyk, B., & Feeney, T. J. (1992). Social skills following traumatic brain injury. Seminars in Speech and Language, 13(4), 308-319.

Appendix A Core Vocabulary

1 Susan Balandin, PhD, Centre for Developmental Disability Studies, P0 Box 6, Ryde, NSW 1680, Australia. Phone: +61 298077062 Fax: +61 298077053 Email:

susanb@med.usyd.edu.au

2 The study received ethical clearance from Macquarie University Ethics Committee and the Spastic Centre of New South Wales’ ethics committee. All participants signed a letter of consent. The project and issues of confidentiality were explained and explored in detail.