The Influence of Language Context on Repetitive Speech Use in Children With Autism Spectrum Disorder

Abstract

Purpose Although repetitive speech is a hallmark characteristic of autism spectrum disorder (ASD), the contributing factors that influence repetitive speech use remain unknown. The purpose of this exploratory study was to determine if the language context impacts the amount and type of repetitive speech produced by children with ASD. Method As part of a broader word-learning study, 11 school-age children with ASD participated in two different language contexts: storytelling and play. Previously collected language samples were transcribed and coded for four types of repetitive speech: immediate echolalia, delayed echolalia, verbal stereotypy, and vocal stereotypy. The rates and proportions of repetitive speech were compared across the two language contexts using Wilcoxon signed-ranks tests. Individual characteristics were further explored using Spearman correlations. Results The children produced lower rates of repetitive speech during the storytelling context than the play-based context. Only immediate echolalia differed between the two contexts based on rate and approached significance based on proportion, with more immediate echolalia produced in the play-based context than in the storytelling context. There were no significant correlations between repetitive speech and measures of social responsiveness, expressive or receptive vocabulary, or nonverbal intelligence. Conclusions The children with ASD produced less immediate echolalia in the storytelling context than in the play-based context. Immediate echolalia use was not related to social skills, vocabulary, or nonverbal IQ scores. These findings offer valuable insights into better understanding repetitive speech use in children with ASD.

Conventions for unconventional language: Revisiting a framework for spoken language features in autism

“…Contextual and Individual Correlates. Delayed echolalia appears to be less common than immediate echolalia (Gladfelter & Vanzuiden, 2020;Rydell & Mirenda, 1994;Van Santen et al, 2013), but even so, it may be more frequent than other commonly studied features of language use by individuals on the spectrum. For instance, Szatmari et al (1995) found thatin children on the autism spectrum who had "functional" language -50% used delayed echolalia, whereas only 26% showed pronoun reversal and 10.5% used neologisms.…”

Repeating purposefully: Empowering educators with functional communication models of echolalia in Autism

“…Prizant and Duchan (1981) provided a detailed accounting of contextual elements of which teachers may be aware, including whether or not the previous utterance in an interaction was spoken directly to the Echolalic, and how it was structured. Subsequent research has shown that children are more likely to use echolalia when they are addressed with highconstraint utterances, such as direct verbal commands and questions that required single, specific responses (Gladfelter & VanZuiden, 2020;Rydell & Mirenda, 1994). Teachers can choose to use low-constraint communication styles, such as more open-ended questions and statements/comments, with their students who use echolalia.…”

Echolalia as communication behavior

“…Thus, interdisciplinary research confirms the relationship between new stimuli and the increase in echolalia and indicates that less echolalia appears in the conditions of image storytelling (during visual hints) than in play situations with peers (Gladfelter & VanZuiden, 2020;Lew-Koralewicz, 2020, p. 188). These findings should be taken into account when planning therapy.…”