Interaction symmetry: Assessing augmented speaker and oral speaker performances across four tasks

References

• Anderson, A. H., Bader, M., Bard, E. G., Boyle, E., Doherty, G., Garrod, S., … Weinert, R. (1991). The HRCR map task corpus. Language and Speech, 34(4), 351–366. doi:10.1177/002383099103400404
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Auer, P., & Hörmeyer, I. (2017). Achieving intersubjectivity in augmented and alternative communication (AAC): Intercorporeal, embodied and disembodied practices. In C. Meyer, J. Streek, and J. S. Jordan (Eds.), Intercorporeality. Emerging Socialities in Interaction (pp. 323–360). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Barnes, S., & Bloch, S. (2019). Why is measuring communication difficult? A critical review of current speech pathology concepts and measures. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 33(3), 219–236. doi:10.1080/02699206.2018.1498541
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baxter, S., Enderby, P., Evans, P., & Judge, S. (2012). Barriers and facilitators to the use of high technology augmentative and alternative communication devices: A systematic review and qualitative synthesis. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 47(2), 115–129. doi:10.1111/j.1460-6984.2011.00090
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beukelman, D. R., & Mirenda, P. (2013). Augmentative and alternative communication: Supporting children and adults with complex communication needs. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
   Google Scholar
• Blackstone, S. W., Williams, M. B., & Wilkins, D. P. (2007). Key principles underlying research and practice in AAC. Augmentative and Alternative Communication (Baltimore, Md. : 1985), 23(3), 191–203. doi:10.1080/07434610701553684
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bloch, S. J., & Wilkinson, R. (2013). Multiple troubles and repair in voice output communication aid-mediated interaction. In Aided communication in dialogical perspectives. Augmentative and alternative communication as action and participation within embodied social worlds (pp. 95–126). Guildford, UK: J&R Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bolden, G. B. (2011). On the organization of repair in multiperson conversation: The case of “other”-selection in other-initiated repair sequences. Research on Language & Social Interaction, 44(3), 237–262. doi:10.1080/08351813.2011.591835
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chapanis, A., Ochsman, R. B., Parrish, R. N., & Weeks, G. D. (1972). Studies in interactive communication: I. the effects of four communication modes on the behavior of teams during cooperative problem solving. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 14(6), 487–509. doi:10.1177/001872087201400601
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark, H. H. (1996). Using language. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Clark, H. H., & Brennan, S. E. (1991). Grounding in communication. In L. Resnick and J. Levine (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (127–149). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
   Google Scholar
• Clarke, M., & Wilkinson, R. (2008). Interaction between children with cerebral palsy and their peers 2: Understanding initiated VOCA-mediated turns. Augmentative and Alternative Communication (Baltimore, Md. : 1985), 24(1), 3–15. doi:10.1080/07434610701390400
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooper, L., Balandin, S., & Trembath, D. (2009). The loneliness experiences of young adults with cerebral palsy who use alternative and augmentative communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication (Baltimore, Md. : 1985), 25(3), 154–164. doi:10.1080/07434610903036785
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cornish, J., & Higginbotham, D. J. (2007). Annotation manual (Unpublished Manuscript). New York: University at Buffalo.
   Google Scholar
• Cornish, J., & Higginbotham, D. J. (2008a, November). Assessing Interaction I: Effect of task type on grounded contributions and multimodality on augmented interactions. Poster Session Presented at the American Speech-Language and Hearing Association, Chicago, IL.
   Google Scholar
• Cornish, J., & Higginbotham, D. J. (2008b, November). Assessing Interaction II: Effect of task type communication grounding process. Poster Session Presented at the American Speech-Language and Hearing Association, Chicago, IL.
   Google Scholar
• Doyle, M., & Phillips, B. (2001). Trends in augmentative and alternative communication use by individuals with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 17(3), 167–178. doi:10.1080/aac.17.3.167.178
   Google Scholar
• Enfield, N. J. (2017). How we talk: The inner workings of conversation. Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Enfield, N., & Sidnell, J. (2017). On the concept of action in the study of interaction. Discourse Studies, 19(5), 515–535. doi:10.1177/1461445617730235
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Engelke, C. R., & Higginbotham, D. J. (2013). Looking to speak: On the temporality of misalignment in interaction involving an augmented communicator using eye-gaze technology. Journal of Interactional Research in Communication Disorders, 4(1), 95–122. doi:10.3109/07434618.2013.767556
   Google Scholar
• Fulcher-Rood, K., & Higginbotham, J. (2019). Interacting with persons who have ALS: Time, media, modality, and collaboration via speech-generating devices. Topics in Language Disorders, 39(4), 370–388. doi:10.1097/TLD.0000000000000195
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodwin, C. (2018). Co-operative action. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Higginbotham, D. J., Bisantz, A. M., Sunm, M., Adams, K., & Yik, F. (2009). The effect of context priming and task type on augmentative communication performance. Augmentative and Alternative Communication (Baltimore, Md. : 1985), 25(1), 19–31. doi:10.1080/07434610802131869
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Higginbotham, D. J., & Caves, K. (2002). AAC performance and usability issues: The effect of AAC technology on the communicative process. Assistive Technology : The Official Journal of Resna, 14(1), 45–57. doi:10.1080/10400435.2002.10132054
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Higginbotham, D. J., Fulcher, K., & Seale, J. M. (2016). Time and timing in ALS in interactions involving individuals with ALS, their unimpaired partners and their speech generating devices. In M. Smith (Ed.), Language learning and language use in aided communication (199–227). London, UK: J&R Press.
   Google Scholar
• Higginbotham, D. J., Kim, K., & Scally, C. (2007). The effect of the communication output method on augmented interaction. Augmentative and Alternative Communication (Baltimore, Md. : 1985), 23(2), 140–153. doi:10.1080/07434610601045344
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Higginbotham, D. J., Lesher, G. W., Moulton, B. J., & Roark, B. (2012). The application of natural language processing to augmentative and alternative communication. Assistive Technology, 24(1), 14–24. doi:10.1080/10400435.2011.648714
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Higginbotham, J., & Satchidanand, A. (2019). Eye-talking with, through and against the machine: A case study of an individual with ALS using eye-tracking technology for interaction. Poster Presented at the Atypical Interaction Conference: Resources and Challenges in Participation University of Helsinki, Finland.
   Google Scholar
• Higginbotham, D. J., & Wilkins, D. P. (1999). Slipping through the timestream: Time and timing issues in augmentative communication. In J. Duchan, D. Kovarsky, & M. Maxwell (Eds.), The social construction of language incompetence (49–82). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Hinde, R. A. (1995). A suggested structure for a science of relationships. Personal Relationships, 2(1), 1–15. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6811.1995.tb00074
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hutchby, I. (2013). Conversation and technology: From the telephone to the internet. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Koch-Fager, S., Fried-Oken, M., Jakobs, T., & Beukelman, D. R. (2019). New and emerging access technologies for adults with complex communication needs and severe motor impairments: State of the science. Augmentative and Alternative Communication (Baltimore, Md. : 1985), 35(1), 13–25. doi:10.1080/07434618.2018.1556730
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koester, H. H., & Levine, S. (1996). Effect of a word prediction feature on user performance. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 12(3), 155–168. doi:10.1080/07434619612331277608
   Google Scholar
• Levinson, S. C., & Holler, J. (2014). The origin of human multi-modal communication. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 369(1651), 20130302. doi:10.1098/rstb.2013.0302
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Light, J., & McNaughton, D. (2014). Communicative competence for individuals who require augmentative and alternative communication: A new definition for a new era of communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 30(1), 1–18. doi:10.3109/07434618.2014.885080
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Light, J., McNaughton, D., Beukelman, D., Fager, S. K., Fried-Oken, M., Jakobs, T., & Jakobs, E. (2019). Challenges and opportunities in augmentative and alternative communication: Research and technology development to enhance communication and participation for individuals with complex communication needs. Augmentative and Alternative Communication (Baltimore, Md. : 1985)), 35(1), 1–12. doi:10.1080/07434618.2018.1556732
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luo, F. (2009). Personal narrative telling by individuals with ALS who use AAC devices (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University at Buffalo, New York. Retrieved from the Proquest Dissertations Publishing Database (Accession No. 3342143).
   Google Scholar
• Mathy, P., Yorkston, K., & Gutmann, M. (2000). Augmentative communication for individuals with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. In D. Beukelman, K. Yorkston, & J. Reichle (Eds.), Augmentative communication for adults with neurogenic and neuromotor disabilities (pp. 183–232). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
   Google Scholar
• Marascuilo, L. A., & Serlin, R. C. (1988). Statistical methods for the social and behavioral sciences. New York, NY: WH Freeman/Times Books/Henry Holt & Co.
   Google Scholar
• McNaughton, D., & Light, J. (2015). What we write about when we write about AAC: The past 30 years of research and future directions. Augmentative and Alternative Communication (Baltimore, Md. : 1985), 31(4), 261–270. doi:10.3109/07434618.2015.1099736
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Müller, E., & Soto, G. (2002). Conversation patterns of three adults using aided speech: Variations across partners. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 18(2), 77–90. doi:10.1080/07434610212331281181
   Google Scholar
• Rackensperger, T., Krezman, C., Mcnaughton, D., Williams, M. B., & D'Silva, K. (2005). When I first got it, I wanted to throw it off a cliff:” The challenges and benefits of learning AAC technologies as described by adults who use AAC. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 21(3), 165–186. doi:10.1080/07434610500140360
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robillard, A. B. (1999). Meaning of a disability: The lived experience of paralysis. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50(4), 696–735. doi:10.1353/lan.1974.0010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Savolainen, I., Klippi, A., Tykkyläinen, T., Higginbotham, J., & Launonen, K. (2020). The structure of participants’ turn-transition practices in aided conversations that use speech-output technologies. Augmentative and Alternative Communication (Baltimore, Md. : 1985), 36(1), 18–30. doi:10.1080/074346.2019.1698654
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shellikeri, S., Green, J. R., Kulkarni, M., Rong, P., Martino, R., Zinman, L., & Yunusova, Y. (2016). Speech movement measures as markers of bulbar disease in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research : JSLHR, 59(5), 887–899. doi:10.1044/2016_JSLHR-S-15-0238
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shneiderman, B., Plaisant, C., Cohen, M., Jacobs, S., & Elmqvist, N. (2017). Designing the user interface: Strategies for effective human-computer interaction (global edition). Harlow, UK: Pearson Education.
   Google Scholar
• Streeck, J., Goodwin, C., & LeBaron, C. (2011). Embodied interaction: Language and body in the material world. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Suchman, L. A. (2007). Human-machine reconfigurations: Plans and situated actions (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Todman, J. (2000). Rate and quality of conversations using a text-storage AAC system: Single-case training study. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 16(3), 164–179. doi:10.1080/07434610012331279024
   Google Scholar
• Todman, J., Alm, N., Higginbotham, J., & File, P. (2008). Whole utterance approaches in AAC. Augmentative and Alternative Communication (Baltimore, Md. : 1985), 24(3), 235–254. doi:10.1080/08990220802388271
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsai, M. (2013). Rethinking communicative competence for typical speakers: An integrated approach to its nature and assessment. Pragmatics & Cognition, 21(1), 158–177. doi:10.1075/pc.21.1.07tsa
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsai, M., Scherz, J., & DiLollo, A. (2011). Conversation of augmented and typical speakers-speaking roles versus conversation turns. Asia Pacific Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing, 14(4), 179–185. doi:10.1179/jslh.2011.14.4.179
   Google Scholar
• Waller, A. (2019). Telling tales: Unlocking the potential of AAC technologies. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 54(2), 159–169. doi:10.1111/1460-6984.12449
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilkinson, R., Bloch, S., & Clarke, M. (2011). On the use of graphic resources in interaction by people with communication disorders. In J. Streeck, C. Goodwin, & C. LeBaron (Eds.), Embodied interaction: Language and body in the material world (pp. 152–168). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Williams, M. B., Krezman, C., & McNaughton, D. (2008). Reach for the stars”: Five principles for the next 25 years of AAC. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 24(3), 194–206. doi:10.1080/08990220802387851
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wisenburn, B., & Higginbotham, D. J. (2009). Participant evaluations of rate and communication efficacy of an AAC application using natural language processing. Augmentative and Alternative Communication (Baltimore, Md. : 1985), 25(2), 78–89. doi:10.1080/0743461090273987
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar