Language samples from 10 adults using an augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) system were analyzed for gender differences in performance measures. Participants (5 female; 5 male) were matched on device, access method, software, experience, age, and education. Each participant was asked to describe the "cookie theft" picture from the Boston Diagnostic Aphasia Examination (BDAE; Goodglass & Kaplan, 1983). The language samples were analyzed on the following two dependent variables: frequency of Semantic Compaction™ language representation use and average communication rate. A dependent samples t-test and the equivalent non-parametric matched-pair Wilcoxon tests were conduced on both variables. The effect size and the power were also calculated and used to support the following results. There was not a significant difference in the Semantic Compaction™ dependent variable, however there was a large effect size (d=1.11). A power analysis indicated a sample size consisting of 9 pairs (4 more males and 4 more females) would increase the power to 82%. Further research with an increased sample size of 9 pairs of participants may provide more support for the current finding in relation to the use of Semantic Compaction™.No significant difference was found between the average communication rates of the genders; however the presence of a female outlier was concluded to influence these results. A dependent samples t-test was conducted on the data excluding the pair containing the outlier. The results of the dependent samples t-test indicated a significant difference between the genders in the average communication rates. Overall, for both dependent variables, the majority of males were higher on the performance measures than their paired female participants. These observations support a need for future research addressing gender differences in individuals who use AAC. Clinical implications suggest that future research is needed to determine if intervention strategies need to accommodate for differences between genders in their ability to effectively use their device to communicate as fast as they are able. Caution needs to be used when interpreting and applying these results to this population due to the limitations (i.e., small sample size and lack of control of extraneous variable) of the current study
