以眼動探討符號元素對發展遲緩幼兒及同儕溝通圖形符號辨識差異之研究

Influence of Symbol Components on the Understanding of AAC Graphic Symbols from the Eye Movements of Preschool Children with and without Developmental Delays

運用輔助溝通系統（Augmentative and Alternative Communication， AAC）提升 障礙兒童的溝通能力，已普遍獲得國內外的研究支持，但有關溝通圖形符號的閱 讀和辨識問題，卻較少被客觀地探討。因此，本研究旨在以眼動技術探討符號元 素數量對發展遲緩幼兒及其同儕，在閱讀溝通圖形符號時所產生的影響。研究採 用準實驗研究設計和立意取樣，以18 位就讀幼兒園之發展遲緩幼兒（平均年齡5.7 歲）以及36 位普通幼兒同儕（平均年齡5.4 歲）為對象，並以30 組常用動詞語 彙之溝通圖形符號為研究材料，使用AAC 圖形符號學習系統和Mobile Eye 眼動 儀，蒐集受試者對溝通圖形符號的辨識結果和眼動歷程。研究結果發現：一、普 通幼兒同儕在溝通圖形符號辨識的表現優於發展遲緩幼兒，且符號元素數量與符 號辨識度之間存在正向關係。二、發展遲緩幼兒和普通幼兒同儕在辨識溝通圖形 符號的眼動閱讀時間上有顯著差異，發展遲緩幼兒需要較長的閱讀時間；此外， 單元素符號亦較多元素符號需要較長的閱讀時間。三、發展遲緩幼兒在辨識多元 素符號時，需要較多的圖文凝視時間，同時，普通幼兒同儕在單元素符號的圖文 凝視率和圖形凝視率均顯著較高；此外，普通幼兒同儕在單元素符號的圖文凝視 時間、圖文凝視率和圖形凝視率均顯著高於多元素符號。四、以眼動數據接近該 組平均值之二位個案資料而論，普通幼兒的閱讀眼動軌跡有較多的掃視，能有系 統地凝視每一張圖形符號，以搜尋可供作答的訊息，而發展遲緩幼兒則缺乏系統 性的凝視和掃視。

Purpose: Using Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC) to improve the communication skills of children with disabilities is generally supported by both domestic and foreign scholars. Graphic symbols that represent individual words or phrases are often used in conjunction with AAC; however， research on the reading and recognition of AAC graphic symbols is scant. Therefore， this study examined the influence of symbol components on AAC graphic symbol comprehension among young children with and without developmental delays through an eye-tracking technique. Methods: A quasiexperimental design and purposive sampling were used for this study. A total of 54 participants comprising 18 children with a developmental delay (mean age 5.7 years) and 36 children without a developmental delay (mean age 5.4 years) participated in the study. The AAC Graphic Symbol Learning System and Mobile Eye eye-tracker were used to collect data. Thirty common verbs represented by AAC graphic symbols were used as the experimental material. Findings: The results of the eye-tracking experiments indicated that the symbol recognition of children without a developmental delay was significantly higher than that of children with developmental delays. Additionally， a positive correlation was identified between the number of AAC graphic symbol components and symbol recognition. The findings also revealed that a significant difference existedin the reading times for the cognition of graphic symbols between the children with and without developmental delays. Children with developmental delays required more reading time. Overall， the results demonstrated that single-element graphic symbols necessitated more reading time compared with multielement graphic symbols. Specifically， the children with developmental delays required a longer duration to fixate on the multielement graphic symbolsand achieve recognition. Conversely， the children without developmental delays tended to exhibit a favorable total fixation duration andfixation count， and a highratio of total fixation durations when using single-element graphic symbols compared with when using multielement graphic symbols. Finally， according to the average eye movement data of two subjects， eye movements among the children without developmental delays were saccadic and systematically fixated on each graphic symbol to search and determine answers. By contrast， children with developmental delays lacked systematic fixation and saccadic eye movement. Conclusions: A positive correlation exists between the number of components in AAC graphic symbols and symbol recognition. Therefore， we suggest designing multielement graphic symbols to promote recognition and symbol learning among young children with and without developmental delays. We conclude with some recommendations for further study based on these results.