The idemotor principle’s explicit hypothesises asserts that ideomotor actions are involuntary and unconscious movements that are influenced by preconceptions, suggestions or prior experiences (Jackson, 2005). Therefore, unconscious and involuntary motor behaviour is generated through the recollection of sensorial experiences. As a result, recent studies have discovered that perhaps ideomotor mechanism could also account for facilitated communication due to the link between finger movements and number processing. Furthermore, this paper will conduct an in-depth analysis of ideomotor effect and it’s origin. Also, explore the potential accountability of the ideomotor effect on facilitated communication particularly focusing on Autistic disorder.
…show more content…
In facilitated communication, the arm of a disabled individual is guided by another person known as the ‘facililtor’ towards and onto on a keyboard or other sort of communication device ultimately, allowing those disabled individuals an opportunity to converse (Hyman, 1999). The facilitator physically steadies the autistic individual’s finger as it presses the keys forming coherent sentences (Hyman, 1999). Therefore, this raises the question of could ideomotor effect account for facilitated communication? Numerous findings have denoted that facilitated communication does tap into the mind of an individual who heretofore had been incommunicado (Carroll, 2016). However, majority of studies seem to indicate that facilitated communication only taps into the expectations and beliefs of the facilitator rather than the disabled individual. A link can therefore be drawn to the ideomotor effect since this occurs involuntarily and instinctively. This is evident since research reveals facilitators are genuinely shocked when they discover that they are indeed reporting their own thoughts rather than their patient’s thoughts (Hyman, 1999). A classic example of the ideomotor effect has tackled the phenomena of dowsing, Ouija board, pendulum and many others. As a result, when …show more content…
Many of the facilitated communication criticism are deeply committed to disability rights (Sherry, 2016). The fact that the facilitator is always there holding the individuals arm and the patient is never given the opportunity to independently communicate limits disabled people’s rights because it diverts them from using reliable methods to improve their communication skills (Sherry, 2016). In addition, the facilitators ‘repressed memory’ (Carroll, 2016) of sexual assault can dramatically influence facilitated communication through the notion of ideomotor actions. As a result falsely charge caregivers and/ or parents of sexually abusing a mentally and physically handicapped individual, tearing apart families (Hyman, 1999). This then raises the question of concern because we need to ensure the rights of the patient are not abused even if the evidence demonstrated that indeed these are the patient’s expressions and experiences (Carroll, 2016). Because of the potential intrusion to fundamental human rights of disabled people this ultimately contravenes the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (Burgess & Kirsch & Shane & Niederauer & Graham & Bacon,
In facilitated communication, the arm of a disabled individual is guided by another person known as the ‘facililtor’ towards and onto on a keyboard or other sort of communication device ultimately, allowing those disabled individuals an opportunity to converse (Hyman, 1999). The facilitator physically steadies the autistic individual’s finger as it presses the keys forming coherent sentences (Hyman, 1999). Therefore, this raises the question of could ideomotor effect account for facilitated communication? Numerous findings have denoted that facilitated communication does tap into the mind of an individual who heretofore had been incommunicado (Carroll, 2016). However, majority of studies seem to indicate that facilitated communication only taps into the expectations and beliefs of the facilitator rather than the disabled individual. A link can therefore be drawn to the ideomotor effect since this occurs involuntarily and instinctively. This is evident since research reveals facilitators are genuinely shocked when they discover that they are indeed reporting their own thoughts rather than their patient’s thoughts (Hyman, 1999). A classic example of the ideomotor effect has tackled the phenomena of dowsing, Ouija board, pendulum and many others. As a result, when …show more content…
Many of the facilitated communication criticism are deeply committed to disability rights (Sherry, 2016). The fact that the facilitator is always there holding the individuals arm and the patient is never given the opportunity to independently communicate limits disabled people’s rights because it diverts them from using reliable methods to improve their communication skills (Sherry, 2016). In addition, the facilitators ‘repressed memory’ (Carroll, 2016) of sexual assault can dramatically influence facilitated communication through the notion of ideomotor actions. As a result falsely charge caregivers and/ or parents of sexually abusing a mentally and physically handicapped individual, tearing apart families (Hyman, 1999). This then raises the question of concern because we need to ensure the rights of the patient are not abused even if the evidence demonstrated that indeed these are the patient’s expressions and experiences (Carroll, 2016). Because of the potential intrusion to fundamental human rights of disabled people this ultimately contravenes the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (Burgess & Kirsch & Shane & Niederauer & Graham & Bacon,