Grannie and gramps were presented. Therefore, while not all errors made by individuals who use AAC may be traced to overselective attention, clinicians should be aware of the possibility and consider it as part of their troubleshooting strategy. This is particularly true given that such patterns are not confined to members of any one etiological category. Encouragingly, both the eye-trackingAugment Altern Commun. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 June 01.Dube and WilkinsonPagework and the behavioral studies offer potential solutions when overselective responding is deemed a possibility.NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author ManuscriptAs mentioned above, at present most AAC-related intervention is likely to occur in contexts that do not allow the teacher to track the student’s point of gaze. With time, however, technologies often become more affordable, more widely available, and easier to use. At some point in the near future, many programs may have an eye tracking station integrated with a desktop computer. An important purchase Ro4402257 question follows: What types of software will be needed to maximize the potential for eye tracking to improve AAC instruction? Can continued research in stimulus overselectivity help to answer this question? As one possibility, future research may be organized in terms of two broad categories: diagnostic for overselectivity and remedial for overselectivity. The goal of the former will be to develop assessment procedures that can quantify the adequacy of observing behavior to AAC displays or other educationally relevant visual stimuli. The use of eye tracking technology will allow determination of whether instances of overselectivity follow incomplete observing behavior, or whether observing is adequate and the issue is one of attending (as in the example of Participant DTM in Dube et al. 2010, discussed earlier). The distinction is important because the two types of problems may require different types of solutions. Another issue related to research on assessing overselectivity in AAC concerns the flexibility of observing behavior as the complexity of the display changes. An assessment is needed that will answer the diagnostic question of whether poor performance can be linked to failures to observe all relevant stimuli, or to failures to adjust observing durations as complexity increases (as in Dube et al., 2006). As a speculative example of how these questions might matter from an intervention standpoint, observing failures may be corrected by improving deficient visual search and scanning patterns to include fixations of all relevant stimuli. In contrast, attending failures may require changes in the durations of fixations to each specific symbol (Dube et al., 2006, 2010). Clearly, direct research is needed to support or refute such speculations. Another research question is whether such an assessment will require standardized visual displays, or whether diagnostic algorithms can be developed that can relate the characteristics of observing behavior to any set of defined stimuli. If any set of AICARMedChemExpress AICA Riboside stimuli can provide reliable diagnostic information, then it would be possible to incorporate the individual student’s AAC displays directly into the assessment, thus supporting results that have direct relevance to intervention. An additional assessment-related research question concerns whether overselectivity is more likely to occur with different types of AAC displays. For example, one may co.Grannie and gramps were presented. Therefore, while not all errors made by individuals who use AAC may be traced to overselective attention, clinicians should be aware of the possibility and consider it as part of their troubleshooting strategy. This is particularly true given that such patterns are not confined to members of any one etiological category. Encouragingly, both the eye-trackingAugment Altern Commun. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2015 June 01.Dube and WilkinsonPagework and the behavioral studies offer potential solutions when overselective responding is deemed a possibility.NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author ManuscriptAs mentioned above, at present most AAC-related intervention is likely to occur in contexts that do not allow the teacher to track the student’s point of gaze. With time, however, technologies often become more affordable, more widely available, and easier to use. At some point in the near future, many programs may have an eye tracking station integrated with a desktop computer. An important question follows: What types of software will be needed to maximize the potential for eye tracking to improve AAC instruction? Can continued research in stimulus overselectivity help to answer this question? As one possibility, future research may be organized in terms of two broad categories: diagnostic for overselectivity and remedial for overselectivity. The goal of the former will be to develop assessment procedures that can quantify the adequacy of observing behavior to AAC displays or other educationally relevant visual stimuli. The use of eye tracking technology will allow determination of whether instances of overselectivity follow incomplete observing behavior, or whether observing is adequate and the issue is one of attending (as in the example of Participant DTM in Dube et al. 2010, discussed earlier). The distinction is important because the two types of problems may require different types of solutions. Another issue related to research on assessing overselectivity in AAC concerns the flexibility of observing behavior as the complexity of the display changes. An assessment is needed that will answer the diagnostic question of whether poor performance can be linked to failures to observe all relevant stimuli, or to failures to adjust observing durations as complexity increases (as in Dube et al., 2006). As a speculative example of how these questions might matter from an intervention standpoint, observing failures may be corrected by improving deficient visual search and scanning patterns to include fixations of all relevant stimuli. In contrast, attending failures may require changes in the durations of fixations to each specific symbol (Dube et al., 2006, 2010). Clearly, direct research is needed to support or refute such speculations. Another research question is whether such an assessment will require standardized visual displays, or whether diagnostic algorithms can be developed that can relate the characteristics of observing behavior to any set of defined stimuli. If any set of stimuli can provide reliable diagnostic information, then it would be possible to incorporate the individual student’s AAC displays directly into the assessment, thus supporting results that have direct relevance to intervention. An additional assessment-related research question concerns whether overselectivity is more likely to occur with different types of AAC displays. For example, one may co.