Billets de Michelle Dawson

Billet publié sur Bluesky le 23/05/2024 10:57

Bluesky Publication avec DOI crossref Extrait cité dans le billet Lien intégré au billet Termes sur l’autisme

Liens cités structurés

1 ressource citée

Publication avec DOI Récupéré Publication crossref

Tiffany L Hutchins, Sophie E Knox, E Cheryl Fletcher (2024). Natural language acquisition and gestalt language processing: A critical analysis of their application to autism and speech language therapy. Autism & Developmental Language Impairments, 9, 23969415241249944. SAGE Publications.

Date de publication
22/05/2024
Identifiant
10.1177/23969415241249944
Auteurs
Tiffany L Hutchins, Sophie E Knox, E Cheryl Fletcher
Source
Autism & Developmental Language Impairments
Détails
9, 23969415241249944
Type de référence
article
Éditeur
SAGE Publications
Source de métadonnées
crossref

Résumé

Background and Aim Recently, there has been a lot of interest surrounding the term gestalt language processor (GLP) which is associated with Natural Language Acquisition (NLA): a protocol intended to support the language development of autistic people. In NLA, delayed echolalia is presumed raw source material that GLPs use to acquire language in a stage-like progression from delayed echolalia to spontaneous speech. The aim of this article is to evaluate NLA in light of relevant literatures to allow scrutiny of NLA claims. Main contributions First, we review the notion of gestalt language and situate it in the broader literature on language styles to update understanding of its significance. We then review the links from gestalt language processing to autism and identify definitional and conceptual problems and clarify the construct ‘episodic memory’. We discuss the ‘raw material view of delayed echolalia’ and identify theoretical and empirical shortcomings. Finally, we review Blanc’s language stages and their accompanying assessment and language support recommendations and challenge their validity. Conclusions & Implications The term ‘gestalt language processor’ is definitionally and conceptually troubled, the assertion that autistic people are GLPs is misleading and unhelpful, and evidence is lacking that GLP represents a legitimate clinical entity. The theoretical basis of NLA lacks empirical support. NLA stages are implausible and their accompanying assessment and support recommendations lack justification. We recommend the use of alternate, individualized, theoretically-sound, evidence-based, neurodiversity-affirming supports that are sensitive and responsive to the heterogeneity that defines autism.

Auteur·ices de l’étude dans cette référence citée