6533b7dafe1ef96bd126e123
RESEARCH PRODUCT
Does Linguistic Analysis Confirm the Validity of Facilitated Communication?
Timo Saloviitasubject
030506 rehabilitationCognitive NeuroscienceResearch methodologykommunikaatio03 medical and health sciencesmedicineta516Facilitated communicationContent (Freudian dream analysis)ta515Communicationbusiness.industry05 social sciences050301 educationIdeomotor phenomenonmedicine.diseasefasilointilingvistinen analyysiPsychiatry and Mental healthLinguistic analysisAugmentative and alternative communicationNeurologyfacilitated communicationPediatrics Perinatology and Child HealthAutismNeurology (clinical)0305 other medical sciencebusinessPsychology0503 educationlinguistic analysisCognitive psychologydescription
Facilitated communication (FC) has been interpreted as an ideomotor phenomenon, in which one person physically supports another person’s hand and unconsciously affects the content of the writing. Despite the strong experimental evidence against the authenticity of FC output, several studies claim to support its validity based on idiosyncrasies found in the texts produced. A review of these studies showed that, because of the logical circularity of the reasoning proposed in the studies, no decisive evidence that validated FC was presented. In addition, the idiosyncrasies found were better explained as by-products of the unusual writing process itself. Finally, the studies did not fulfill the quality standards proposed by the FC field itself.
| year | journal | country | edition | language |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2016-05-02 |