Facilitated Communication and Authorship: A Systematic Review

Abstract

Facilitated Communication (FC) is a technique whereby individuals with disabilities and communication impairments allegedly select letters by typing on a keyboard while receiving physical support, emotional encouragement, and other communication supports from facilitators. The validity of FC stands or falls on the question of who is authoring the typed messages -the individual with a disability or the facilitator. The International Society for Augmentative and Alternative Communication (ISAAC) formed an Ad Hoc Committee on FC and charged this committee to synthesize the evidence base related to this question in order to develop a position statement. The purpose of this paper is to report this synthesis of the extant peer-reviewed literature on the question of authorship in FC. A multi-faceted search was conducted including electronic database searches, ancestry searches, and contacting selected authors. The authors considered synopses of systematic reviews, and systematic reviews, which were supplemented with individual studies not included in any prior reviews. Additionally, documents submitted by the membership were screened for inclusion. The evidence was classifi ed into articles that provided (a) quantitative experimental data related to the authorship of messages, (b) quantitative descriptive data on the output generated through FC without testing of authorship, (c) qualitative descriptive data on the output generated via FC without testing of authorship, and (d) anecdotal reports in which writers shared their perspectives on FC. Only documents with quantitative experimental data were analyzed for authorship. Results indicated unequivocal evidence for facilitator control: messages generated through FC are authored by the facilitators rather than the individuals with disabilities. Hence, FC is a technique that has no validity.

Maintaining Professional Relationships in an Interdisciplinary Setting: Strategies for Navigating Nonbehavioral Treatment Recommendations for Individuals with Autism

“…For example, chelation therapy poses a risk to client safety because it has been linked to the death of at least one individual with ASD (Kane 2006). Facilitated communication is another example of a treatment that poses a risk to client safety because it claims to produce gains in language skills, though research has unequivocally shown it does not (Mostert 2001;Schlosser et al 2014). Given the intensive time and resources necessary to implement facilitated communication, this treatment is likely to cause psychological harm in the form of limiting the client's access services that have a strong research foundation.…”

AAC Interventions for Individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorders: State of the Science and Future Research Directions

“…The research literature has clearly and repeatedly debunked facilitated communication, noting that the majority of the messages having been produced by the facilitator, or prompter, rather than the person with complex communication needs (Ganz, 2014;Mostert, 2001Mostert, , 2010Saloviita, Leppänen, & Ojalammi, 2014;Schlosser et al, 2014). That is, researchers have demonstrated that when the facilitator and the individual with complex communication needs are given separate stimuli, the message produced most frequently corresponds with the stimuli given to the facilitators (Bebko, Perry, & Bryson, 1996;Cabay, 1994;Hirshoren & Gregory, 1995;Kerrin, Murdock, Sharpton, & Jones, 1998).…”

Social media and social marketing in relation to facilitated communication: Harnessing the affordances of social media for knowledge translation

“…It might interest Wikipedia TM editors, and others proclaiming that FC is a controversial technique, to know that the literature on FC now reflects consensus rather than controversy in revealing facilitator influence over messages delivered by FC (see Heizen, Lilienfield, & Nolan, 2014;Saloviita, Leppä nen, & Ojalammi, 2014;Schlosser et al, 2014;Tostanoski, Lang, Raulston, Carnett, & Davis, 2014;Travers et al, 2014).…”