The Role of Pragmatic Abilities in Facilitating Self-Advocacy

Students with language and learning needs face challenges in their social interactions with others. Among the essential aspects needed for social interactions is pragmatics, which encompasses the ability to use language appropriately in various social contexts. This post explores why solid pragmatic abilities are fundamental for self-advocacy purposes in students with socialization difficulties.

Pragmatic abilities contribute significantly to successful social interactions, forming the foundation for building relationships and navigating complex social environments (Rose-Krasnor, 1997). For students with socialization deficits, improving pragmatic language skills is crucial for building meaningful connections and successfully advocating for their needs.

Effective self-advocacy requires navigating social challenges and solving problems in interpersonal relationships (Parsi, Whittaker, & Jones, 2018). Pragmatic language skills contribute to students’ capacity to interpret social situations, understand the intentions of others, and negotiate conflicts. These skills provide them with the tools they need to articulate their feelings, needs, and preferences for self-advocacy purposes.  For students with language deficits, clear communication is a powerful tool for self-advocacy, allowing them to articulate their requirements and preferences in a way that others can understand. Solid pragmatic language abilities provide children with the means to communicate their thoughts and feelings effectively.

Strong pragmatic language skills contribute to increased self-confidence and self-esteem, as the student becomes more adept at navigating social situations (Borelli & Prinstein, 2006; Donnellan, Trzesniewski, & Robins, 2011). According to studies, the link between social relationships and self-esteem is truly reciprocal in all developmental stages across the lifespan (Harris & Orth, 2020). 

As students with socialization needs progress in improving their pragmatic language skills, they gain the ability to communicate their needs independently. This independence is a critical aspect of self-advocacy (Kistner, David, & Repper, 2007). 

Pragmatic abilities also play a role in emotional regulation (Griffiths et al, 2021). Students with socialization needs find it challenging to express their emotions appropriately. Effective communication, guided by pragmatic skills, enables them to convey their feelings, fostering a better understanding of others and providing a foundation for emotional well-being (Price & Hooven, 2018). 

In conclusion, pragmatic competence is integral for self-advocacy purposes in students with socialization difficulties. These skills empower them to express their needs, navigate social situations, build relationships, and regulate their emotions effectively (Parsi, Whittaker, & Jones, 2018). Recognizing the importance of pragmatics in the development of communication skills is essential for creating supportive environments that enable these students to thrive socially and emotionally. Evidence-based pragmatic language therapy can help students with pragmatic needs navigate social environments more easily. Fostering good pragmatic language abilities is paramount for individuals with socialization needs to advocate for themselves successfully.  By addressing pragmatic language needs early and implementing targeted interventions therapists can empower clients to navigate the complexities of social interactions and become effective self-advocates.


  1. Borelli, J. L., & Prinstein, M. J. (2006). Reciprocal, longitudinal associations among adolescents’ negative feedback-seeking, depressive symptoms, and peer relations. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 34, 154 –169.
  2. Brummelman, E., Nelemans, S. A., Thomaes, S., & Orobio de Castro, B. (2017). When parents’ praise inflates, children’s self-esteem deflates. Child Development, 88, 1799 –1809. 
  3. Carpendale, J., & Lewis, C. (2006). How children develop social understanding. Blackwell Publishing.
  4. Donnellan, M. B., Trzesniewski, K. H., & Robins, R. W. (2011). Self-esteem: Enduring issues and controversies. In T. Chamorro-Premuzic, S. von Stumm, & A. Furnham (Eds.), The Wiley-Blackwell handbook of individual differences (pp. 718 –746). London, UK: Blackwell.
  5. Field, S., Sarver, M., & Shaw, S. (2003). Self-determination: A key to success in postsecondary education for students with learning disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 24(6), 339-349.
  6. Griffiths S, Suksasilp C, Lucas L, Sebastian CL, Norbury C, the SCALES team. (2021) Relationship between early language competence and cognitive emotion regulation in adolescence. R. Soc. Open Sci. 8: 210742.
  7. Gruenenfelder-Steiger, A. E., Harris, M. A., & Fend, H. A. (2016). Subjective and objective peer approval evaluations and self-esteem development: A test of reciprocal, prospective, and long-term effects. Developmental Psychology, 52, 1563–1577.
  8. Harris MA, Orth U. (2020) The link between self-esteem and social relationships: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 119(6):1459-1477.
  9. Kistner, J., David, C., & Repper, K. (2007). Self-enhancement of peer acceptance: Implications for children’s self-worth and interpersonal functioning. Social Development, 16, 24 – 44. 
  10. Kotzer, E., & Margalit, M. (2007). Perception of competence: risk and protective predictors following an e-self-advocacy intervention for adolescents with learning disabilities. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 22(4), 443-457.
  11. Parsi, A., Whittaker, M. C., & Jones, L. E. (2018). Agents of their own success: Self-advocacy skills and self-determination for students with disabilities in the era of personalized learning. National Center for Learning Disabilities.
  12. Price CJ, Hooven C. (2018) Interoceptive Awareness Skills for Emotion Regulation: Theory and Approach of Mindful Awareness in Body-Oriented Therapy (MABT). Frontiers in Psychology. 28;9:798. 
  13. Rose-Krasnor, L. (1997). The nature of social competence: A theoretical review. Social Development, 6(1), 111–135. 
Share this with others

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

    Your Cart
    Your cart is emptyReturn to Shop