Associate Professor Eastern Illinois University Newton, Illinois, United States
Disclosure(s):
Nichole Mulvey, Ph.D., CCC-SLP: No financial or non-financial relationships to disclose
Abstract: When working with school-age children, the “success” of language sampling is contingent upon the engagement expertise of the clinician obtaining the sample for later analysis. How can clinicians alter their usual prompting to obtain more specific social communication assessment information? Social bids and social bid responses that intentionally elicit different social skills for evaluation can be learned and used effectively by clinicians with relatively little practice. This session will define and exemplify intentional social bids and social bid responses that can alter language sample analysis practices to better obtain social communication profiles. Video examples of clinician prompts and social bids, as well as client responses, will be provided to demonstrate the diagnostic utility of language sample analysis for social communication.
Summary of Presentation : Language sample analysis (LSA) is known for its diagnostic utility in many communication domains, including semantics, morphology, and pragmatics and is considered among the best practices for assessing social communication deficits (Elleseff, 2015; American Speech-Language-Hearing Association [ASHA, n.d.-a). Though aspects of social communication may be obtained from interactions in typical language sample contexts, social reciprocity necessary for building relationships may not always be apparent. Quantifying social reciprocity continues to be elusive despite being a clear area of deficit in several disorder areas that speech-language pathologists (SLPs) treat, including autism spectrum disorder, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, and social (pragmatic) communication disorder. However, current standardized and normative measures of social language for the purpose of differential diagnosis lack real-life and real-time application of language necessary for social success, which is necessary to positively identify children with social communication deficits (Izaryk, Edge, & Lechwar, 2020). SLPs know that even mild deviations in expected social communication practices can have negative effects on peer relationships. Ecologically valid diagnoses of social communication deficits and disorders using currently available standardized and normed assessments, however, continues to be challenging, even for experienced SLPs (Elleseff, 2015; Timler & Covey, 2021). Given that social reciprocity is context dependent and varies based on the different demands of a given context (i.e., physical, social, and conversational), SLPs can work to maximize social communication assessment for initial diagnosis and progress monitoring by being more intentional in the social demands of the language sampling context. Timler (2018) suggests SLPs can utilize targeted prompts and LSA that address social/pragmatic language differences. By providing socially based language sampling prompts and using open-ended cueing that differs from typical scaffolding of language, SLPs can find differences in performance that define socially-based communication disorders. Winner, Crooke, and Olswang (2016) define social competence as a judgement other people form about individuals based on their social abilities. Social bids and responses are important for an individual to use because they are considered an expected verbal behavior. Using social bids and responses are a part of being socially competent. One area that SLPs can increase during language sampling is intentional social bidding and social responses that increase the reciprocity demands within a sampling context. A social bid refers to any behavior initiated by a speaker that is directed towards the other person for the purpose of communicating social intent. For example, a social bid could include making a comment or asking a question to initiate an exchange with someone. Social responses, however, refer to any behavior that is in response to another person’s actions with the intent of communication. Essentially, individuals respond to another person’s social bid by providing a related comment, asking a question, or reacting nonverbally. When two people actively use social bids and social responses within conversation, social reciprocity is formed. Social reciprocity refers to the ability for two people to initiate, respond, and take turns during conversation (ASHA, n.d.-b). This presentation will review the fine-tuning of social bidding and social responding that occurred over the course of data collection with over 100 students of varying social ability levels. The author used free resources, including information from the Systematic Analysis of Language Transcription (SALT) website and current language sampling prompts, to maximize the ability to capture the dynamic skills required for effective social communication in school-age children with and without known social communication deficits. The author will provide video examples and exchanges within language samples, critique their own ability to provide authentic social opportunities, and give attendees an opportunity to enhance their use of social language techniques to assess and progress monitor school-age students.
Learning Objectives:
At the completion of this activity, participants should be able to:
Participants will be able to define intentional social bids and responses for language sample analysis.
Participants will be able to differentiate prompting for foundational language skills from prompting for social communication assessment.
Participants will be able to create a list of social bids and responses that match their natural social interaction style.