Facilitating use of speech recognition software for people with disabilities: A comparison of three treatments

References

• Ackermann H., Hertrich I., Hehr T. Oral diadochokinesis in neurological dysarthrias. Folia Phoniatrica Lopopaedica 1995; 47: 15–23
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adams S. Hypokinetic Dysarthria in Parkinson's Disease. Clinical management of sensorimotor speech disorders, M. R McNeil. Theime Medical, New York 1997; 261–286
   Google Scholar
• Blaney B., Wilson J. Acoustic variability in dysarthria and computer speech recognition. Clinical Linguistics and Phonetics 2000; 14: 307–327
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cannito M., Marquardt T. Ataxic Dysarthria. Clinical management of sensorimotor speech disorders, M. R McNeil. Theime Medical, New York 1997; 217–249
   Google Scholar
• Doyle P. C., Leeper H. A., Kotler A., Thomas‐Stonell N., O'Neill C., Dylke M., Rolls K. Dysarthric speech: a comparison of computerized speech recognition and listener intelligibility. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development 1997; 34: 309–316
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dunn L. M., Dunn L. M. Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test‐Revised. American Guidance Service, Circle Pines, MN 1981
   Google Scholar
• Enderby P. M. Frenchay Dysarthria Assessment. Pro‐Ed, Nerang East 1983
   Google Scholar
• Ferrier L. J., Shane H. C., Ballard H. F., Carpenter T., Benoit A. Dysarthric speakers' intelligibility and speech characteristics in relation to computer speech recognition. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 1995; 11: 165–174
   Google Scholar
• Gracco V. Characteristics of speech as a motor control system. Cerebral control of speech and limb movements, G Hammond. Elsevier Science, North‐Holland 1990; 3–28
   Google Scholar
• Hawley M. S. Speech recognition as an input device to electronic assistive technology. British Journal of Occupational Therapy 2002; 65: 15–20
   Google Scholar
• Hird K., Hennessey N. W., Kalish M. Speech access to computer technology for people with physical disabilities. 1997, Final Report submitted to the Office of Disability, Commonwealth Department of Health and Family Services 18 November
   Google Scholar
• Hux K., Rankin‐Erickson J., Manasse N., Lauritzen E. Accuracy of three speech recognition systems: case study of dysarthric speech. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 2000; 16: 186–196
   Google Scholar
• Jayaram G., Abdelhamied K. Experiments in dysarthric speech recognition using artificial neural networks. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development 1995; 32: 162–169
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kotler A., Thomas‐Stonell N. Effects of speech training on the accuracy of speech recognition for an individual with a speech impairment. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 1997; 13: 71–80
   Google Scholar
• Lindblom B. Explaining phonetic variation: a sketch of the H and H theory. Speech production modelling, W. H Hardcastle, A Marchal. Kluwer, Dordrecht 1990; 403–439
   Google Scholar
• Augmentative communication in practice: an introduction, S Millar, A Wilson. CALL Centre, University of Edinburgh 1994
   Google Scholar
• Moncur J. P., Brackett I. P. Modifying vocal behaviour. Harper & Row, New York 1974
   Google Scholar
• Dysarthria: a physiological approach to assessment and treatment, B. E Murdoch. Stanley Thornes, Cheltenham 1998
   Google Scholar
• Pollatsek A., Well A. D. On the use of counterbalanced designs in cognitive research: a suggestion for a better and powerful analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1995; 21: 785–794
   Google Scholar
• Raghavendra P., Rosengren E., Hunnicutt S. An investigation of different degrees of dysarthric speech as input to speaker‐adaptive and speaker‐dependent recognition systems. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 2001; 17: 265–275
   Google Scholar
• Raven J. C. Standard progressive matrices. Australian Council for Educational Research, Melbourne 1989
   Google Scholar
• Rosen K. M., Kent R. D., Delaney A. L., Duffy J. R. Parametric quantitative acoustic analysis of conversation produced by speakers with dysarthria and healthy speakers. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 2006; 49: 395–411
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosen K., Yampolsky S. Automatic speech recognition and a review of its functioning with dysarthric speech. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 2000; 16: 48–60
   Google Scholar
• Thomas‐Stonell N., Kotler A., Leeper H. A., Doyle P. C. Computerized speech recognition: influence of intelligibility and perceptual consistency on recognition accuracy. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 1998; 14: 51–56
   Google Scholar
• Thompson‐Ward E. C., Murdoch B. E. Biofeedback rehabilitation of speech breathing for an individual with dysarthria. Journal of Medical Speech Language Pathology 1997; 5: 277–288
   Google Scholar
• Volin R. A. A relationship between stimulability and the efficacy of visual biofeedback in the training of a respiratory control task. American Journal of Speech‐Language Pathology 1998; 7: 81–90
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woodcock R. W. Woodcock Reading Mastery Test – Revised. American Guidance Service, Circle Pines, MN 1987
   Google Scholar
• Yorkston K. M. Treatment efficacy: dysarthria. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 1996; 39: S46–S57
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Zimmer C. A., Devlin P. M., Werner J. L., Stamp C. V., Bellian K. T., Powell D. M., Edlich R. F. Adaptive communication systems for patients with mobility disorders. Journal of Burn Care and Rehabilitation 1991; 12: 354–360
   PubMedGoogle Scholar