Participant Evaluations of Rate and Communication Efficacy of an AAC Application Using Natural Language Processing

References

• Basil C. Social interaction and learned helplessness in severely disabled children. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 1992; 8: 188–199
   Google Scholar
• Beck A., Dennis M. Attitudes of children toward a similar-aged child who uses augmentative communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 1996; 12: 78–87
   Google Scholar
• Beck A., Fritz H., Keller A., Dennis M. Attitudes of school-aged children toward their peers who use AAC. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 2000; 16: 13–26
   Google Scholar
• Bedrosian J. L., Hoag L. A., McCoy K. F. Relevance and speed of message delivery trade-offs in augmentative and alternative communication. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 2003; 46: 800–817
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Calculator S., Dollaghan C. The use of communication boards in a residential setting: An evaluation. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders 1982; 47: 281–287
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Clark H. Using language. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1996
   Google Scholar
• Clark H., Brennan E. Grounding in communication. Perspectives on socially shared cognition, L. Resnick, J. Levine, S. Teasley. American Psychological Association, Washington, DC 1991; 127–149
   Google Scholar
• Farrier L., Yorkston K., Marriner N., Beukelman D. Conversational control in nonimpaired speakers using an augmentative communication system. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 1985; 1: 650–673
   Google Scholar
• Grice H. Logic and conversation. Syntax and semantics 3: Speech acts, P. Cole, J. Morgan. Academic Press, New York 1975; 41–58
   Google Scholar
• Harris D. Communication interaction processes involving nonvocal physically handicapped children. Topics in Language Disorders 1982; 2: 21–37
   Google Scholar
• Higginbotham D. J., Kim K., Scally C. The effect of the communication output method on augmented interaction. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 2007; 2: 140–153
   Google Scholar
• Higginbotham D. J., Mathy-Laikko P., Yoder D. Studying conversations of augmentative communication system users. The vocally impaired: Clinical practice and research, L. Bernstein. Grune & Stratton, New York 1988; 40–83
   Google Scholar
• Higginbotham D. J., Wilkins D. Slipping through the timestream: Social issues of time and timing in augmented interactions. Constructing (In)competence, D. Kovarsky, J. Duchan, M. Maxwell. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ 1999; 49–82
   Google Scholar
• Hoag L. A., Bedrosian J., Johnson D., Molineux B. Variables affecting perceptions of social aspects of the communicative competence of an adult AAC user. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 1994; 10: 129–137
   Google Scholar
• Hoag L. A., Bedrosian J. L., McCoy K. F., Johnson D. E. Trade-offs between informativeness and speed of message delivery in augmentative and alternative communication. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 2004; 47: 1270–1285
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim K. Effect of speech rate on the comprehension and subjective judgments of synthesized narrative discourse. University at Buffalo, , NY 2001, Doctoral dissertation. (UMI No. 3010837)
   Google Scholar
• King J., Spoeneman T., Stuart S., Beukelman D. R. Small talk in adult conversations: implications for AAC vocabulary selection. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 1995; 11: 260–264
   Google Scholar
• Langer S., Hickey M. Augmentative and alternative communication and natural language processing: Current research activities and prospects. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 1999; 15: 260–268
   Google Scholar
• Light J. C., Binger C., Smith A. Story reading interactions between preschoolers who use AAC and their mothers. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 1994; 10: 255–268
   Google Scholar
• McCarthy J., Light J. Attitudes toward individuals who use augmentative and alternative communication: Research review. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 2005; 21: 41–55
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCoy K. F., Bedrosian J. L., Hoag L. A. Pragmatic trade-offs in utterance-based systems: Uncovering technological implications. ASHA (American Speech-Language-Hearing Association), Division 12 Newsletter, D. J. Higginbotham, 2001; 23–29
   Google Scholar
• McCoy K. F., Bedrosian J. L., Hoag L. A., Johnson D. E. Brevity and speed of message delivery trade-offs in augmentative and alternative communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 2007; 23: 76–88
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Müller E., Soto G. Conversation patterns of three adults using aided speech: Variations across partners. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 2002; 18: 77–90
   Google Scholar
• Norman K. L., Shneiderman B., Harper B., Slaughter L. Questionnaire for user interaction satisfaction. University of Maryland, Human-Computer Interaction Laboratory, College Park, MD 1998
   Google Scholar
• Robillard A. Communication problems in the intensive care unit. Qualitative Sociology 1994; 17: 383–395
   Google Scholar
• Shneiderman B. Designing the user interface. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA 1998
   Google Scholar
• Sperber D., Wilson D. Relevance: Communication and cognition. Blackwell, OxfordUK 1995
   Google Scholar
• Todman J. Rate and quality of conversations using a text-storage AAC system: Single-case training study. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 2000; 16: 164–179
   Google Scholar
• Todman J., Alm N. Pragmatics and AAC approaches to conversational goals. Proceedings of the 35th annual meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL) and the 8th conference of the European Chapter of the ACL, A. Copestake, S. Langer, S. Palazuelos-Cagigas. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, CA July, 1997; 1–8, Madrid, Spain
   Google Scholar
• Todman J., Rzepecka H. Effect of pre-utterance pause length on perceptions of communicative competence in AAC-aided conversations. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 2003; 19: 222–234
   Google Scholar
• Vanderheiden G. Non-conversational communication technology needs of individuals with handicaps. Rehabilitation World 1983; 7: 8–12
   Google Scholar
• Wisenburn B. The use of natural language processing for augmentative-alternative communication utterance generation. State University of New York at Buffalo. 2005, Doctoral dissertation. (Proquest No. 3156992)
   Google Scholar
• Wisenburn B., Higginbotham D. J. An AAC application using speaking partner speech recognition to automatically produce contextually relevant utterances: Objective results. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 2008; 24: 100–109
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar