Paper 1 Sample Experiment

This is a sample experiment based on FC that was done by a student from a previous E105 class. It is a good outline of the basic structure of what we expect of your experiments that are based on animal communication. The only thing that you will need to add to this basic outline is your statement of which topic you are pursuing: 1) The Structure of Human Language vs. Animal Communication or 2) The Use of Human Language vs. Animal Communication.

The Validity of Facilitated Communication

Experiment 1: 3 objects and their functions

Rationale/Problem: The goal of this experiment is to test whether the facilitator in FC is influencing the communication of the autistic subject. This will be achieved by creating two situations in which the facilitator's knowledge of the correct responses to the task differ.

Hypothesis: We believe that when the facilitator knows the correct answer to the question posed, the output of FC will be correct; however, when the facilitator is ignorant of the desired answer, we believe that the output will be incorrect or non-existent.

Method/Design:

Subjects: The experiment will be performed on 10 autistic individuals that have already been using FC for more than 1 year. They will be paired with the facilitator that they have the most familiarity with, and that they have had the most success with.

Procedure: There will be 2 stages of testing: 1) the facilitator is absent for the presentation of the objects of questioning and 2) the facilitator is present for these presentations. This will effectively isolate two situations in which the knowledge of the facilitator differs.

In both stages, three different object will be presented to the autistic individual: a spoon, a guitar, and a banana. The tester (a graduate student) will name each object and make its primary use clear verbally and gesturally.

In stage 1, the facilitator will not be in the room during the presentations, but will return between presentations to facilitate the subject's answering of the following two questions:

1. What object did I show you?
2. What is that object used for?

Stage 2 will differ only in that the facilitator will remain present in the room for the presentation of the objects.

Discussion: There are three possible outcomes of this experiment: a) the subjects will consistently answer the questions correctly in both stages; b) the subjects will be able to answer the questions in Stage 2, but will be unable to answer the questions in Stage 1; c) the answers will be inconsistently correct / incorrect or inconsistent between individuals and / or between Stages.

In the case of a) we would have to conclude that facilitated communication is, contrary to our hypothesis, a valid form of communication for autistic individuals, since it would be clear that the (lack of) knowledge of the facilitator does not affect the communication.

b) would support our hypothesis that FC is not a valid form of communication because it would be clear that it is the knowledge of the facilitator that is the key factor in correct performance of the task.

If the results are however inconsistent (as in c)) no conclusions could be adequately drawn from this test and the results would have to be carefully examined to design more a more sensitive testing procedure.