![Sample our Health and Social Care journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5938/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Health-Social-Care.jpg"})
Abstract
Four brands of electronic communication devices and three input selection methods were compared in terms of speed and accuracy. Sixteen able-bodied subjects (college students) used one of eight possible device/input method combinations to copy text or engage in a scripted interactive communication task. The printed outputs were analyzed for the number of words generated and the number of errors made. The electronic communication devices included the Equalizer, the EvalPAC, the ScanWRITER, and the Apple Macintosh with Screentyper software. The input selection methods included row-column scanning with a single switch, directed scanning using a joystick, and direct selection/access using head control. Analyses of the subjects' printed outputs, produced following short-term training, showed that the input selection method was a significant factor in text input rate for both text copying and interactive communication. The input method had no significant effect, however, on accuracy during either text copying or interactive communication. Surprisingly, the specific electronic communication device had little or no significant effect on rate or accuracy when the input selection method was the same. Direct selection using the EvalPAC's head mounted light pointer was by far the fastest of the device/input method combinations tested. For some of the communication devices examined, joystick control of the cursor was more rapid or accurate than single switch row-column scanning. Error types and frequencies of their occurrence were similar for both text copying and interactive communication tasks. The two most common types of errors were the insertion or omission of characters or spaces.