AMANDA HYNAN FINAL THESIS PDF

communication partners often take a dominant position making the interaction
asymmetrical and placing the people who use AAC into a passive role. The typically
speaking partner is likely to: ask more closed questions, be less responsive to
communication attempts, have decreased expectations of communicative competence
and give insufficient pause time between turns. Their study found when typically
speaking communication partners extended the time they paused between turns,
sometimes for as long as 45 seconds, young people who used AAC showed a greater
number of conversational responses. Extended pause time within conversations may
be one of the most difficult aspects for a typically speaking partner to feel comfortable
with. Extended pauses of longer than 2-3 seconds challenge pragmatic conventions
within conversations and unless sanctioned in some way can lead to feelings of
discomfort and also lower perceptions of social competence (McLaughlin & Cody,
1982; McCarthy & Light, 2005; McCoy, Bedrosian, Hoag & Johnson, 2007; Todman
et al. 2008).
Another implication for the time taken to have face-to-face conversations is the
challenge it presents for attention skills. Thistle and Wilkinson (2012) describe how
carrying out the dual task of following a conversation and operating a technical device
creates additional pressure for people who use AAC as they have to focus on typing
text (or locating symbols) whilst following the thread of a conversation which in
certain situations can also change direction during the composition of their intended
message. The communication partner also has to maintain attention and stay focused
on the thread of the conversation, as depending on the complexity of the message, it
may take people who use AAC a considerable time to prepare their message,
especially if it is a novel message that has not been pre-prepared.
2.2.7. Narrative and humour
One of the challenges of using AAC is the creation of personal narratives and being
able to express humour (Grove & Tucker, 2003). Waller (2006) discusses how
discourse can be described as taking two forms,
“transactional (expressing concrete needs/wants and transferring
information) and interactional conversation (telling jokes/sharing
experiences, discussing philosophy etc.)” (p. 221).
28