References
- Carlsen, K., Hux, K., & Beukelman, D. (1994). Comprehension of synthetic speech by individuals with aphasia. Journal of Medi-cal Speech-Language Pathology, 2, 105–112.
- Dahle, A., & Goldman, R. (1990). Perception of synthetic speech by normal and developmentally disabled children. Asha, 32, 143. Haycock, K., Roth, J., Gagnon, J. (1993). Statview 4.01. Berkeley, CA: Abacus Concepts, Inc.
- Hoover, J., Reichle, J., Van Tasell, D., & Cole, D. (1987). The intelligibility of synthesized speech: Echo ll versus Votrax. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 30, 425–431.
- Kalikow, D. N., Stevens, K. N., & Elliot, L. L. (1977). Development of a test of speech intelligibility in noise using sentence mate-rials with controlled word predictability. Journal of the Acous-tical Society of America, 61, 1339–1351.
- Kirk, R. (1968). Experimental design procedures for the behav-ioral sciences. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing.
- Logan, J., Greene, B., & Pisoni, D. (1989). Segmental intelligibil-ity of synthetic speech produced by rule. Journal of the Acous-tical Society of America, 86, 566–581.
- Manous, L., Pisoni, D., Dedina, M., & Nusbaum, H. (1985). Comprehension of natural and synthetic speech using a sentence verification task. Research on Speech Perception Progress Report No. 11 (pp. 33–58). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University.
- Massey, N. (1988). Language-impaired children's comprehen-sion of synthesized speech. Language, Speech & Hearing Services in Schools, 19, 395–400.
- McNaughton, D., Fallon, K., Tod, J., Weiner, F., & Neisworth, J. (1994). Effect of repeated listening experiences on the intelli-gibility of synthesized speech. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 10, 161–168.
- Mirenda, P., & Beukelman, D. R. (1987). A comparison of speech synthesis intelligibility with listeners from three age groups. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 3,120–128.
- Mitchell, P., & Atkins, C. (1989). A comparison of the single word intelligibility of two voice output communication aids. Augmen-tative and Alternative Communication, 4,84–88.
- Nusbaum, H., & Pisoni, D. (1984). Constraints on the perception of synthetic speech generated by rule. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 17, 235–242.
- Raghavendra, P., & Allen, G. D. (1993). Comprehension of syn-thetic speech with three text-to-speech systems using a sentence verification paradigm. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 9,126–133.
- Ralston, J., Pisoni, D., Lively, S., Greene, B., & Mullennix, J. (1991). Comprehension of synthetic speech produced by rule: Word monitoring and sentence-by-sentence listening times. Human Factors, 33,471–491.
- Schwab, E., Nusbaum, H., & Pisoni, D. (1985). Some effects of training on the perception of synthetic speech. Human Factors, 27, 296–309.
- Vanderheiden, G. (1975). Providing the child with a means to communicate. In G. C. Vanderheiden & K. Grilley (Eds.), Non-vocal communication techniques and aids for the severely handicapped (pp. 20–36). Baltimore: University Park Press.