Designing interaction, voice, and inclusion in AAC research

References

• Acero, A. (1995). The role of phoneticians in speech technology. In G. Bloothooft, V. Hazan, D. Huber, & J. Llisterri (Eds.), European studies in phonetics and speech communication (pp. 170–175). Utrecht, Netherlands: OTS.
   Google Scholar
• Alm, N., & Newell, A. (1996). Being an interesting conversation partner. In S. von Tetzchner & M. H. Jensen (Eds.), Augmentative and alternative communication: European perspectives (pp. 171–181). London, UK: Whurr.
   Google Scholar
• Alper, M. (2017). Giving voice: Mobile communication, disability, and inequality. Cambridge (MA): The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Aylett, M., Potard, B., Pullin, G., Hennig, S., Braude, D., & Ferreira, M. (2016). Don’t say yes, say yes: Interacting with synthetic speech using Tonetable. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 3643–3646). New York (NY): ACM. doi:10.1145/2851581.2890245
   Google Scholar
• Blackstone, S., Williams, M., & Wilkins, D. (2007). Key principles underlying research and practice in AAC. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 23, 191–203. doi:10.1080/07434610701553684
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buchenau, M., & Fulton Suri, J. (2000). Experience prototyping. In Proceedings of the 3rd Conference on Designing Interactive Systems (DIS): Processes, practices, methods, and techniques (pp. 424–433). New York (NY): ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Campbell, N. (2005). Getting to the heart of the matter: Speech as the expression of affect, rather than just text or language. Language Resources & Evaluation, 39, 109–118. doi:10.1007/s10579-005-2699-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Charlton, J. (1998). Nothing about us without us: Disability oppression and empowerment. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Clark, H.H. (1996). Using language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Clark, H.H., & Brennan, S.E. (1991). Grounding in communication. In L. B. Resnick, J. M. Levine, & S.D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 127–149). Washington (DC): American Psychological Association.
   Google Scholar
• Clarke, M., & Bloch, S. (2013). AAC practices in everyday interaction. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 29, 1–2. doi:10.3109/07434618.2013.767487
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cook, A. (2013). Studying interaction design by designing interactions with tone of voice. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). University of Dundee, Dundee, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Crampton Smith, G., & Tabor, P. (2007). Interaction design. Retrieved from http://www.interaction-venice.com
   Google Scholar
• Dunne, A., & Raby, F. (2001). Design noir: The secret life of electronic objects. Basel, Switzerland: Birkhäuser.
   Google Scholar
• Ebert, R. (2012). Life itself: A memoir. New York (NY): Grand Central.
   Google Scholar
• Engelke, C.R. (2013). Technically speaking: On the structure and experience of interaction involving augmentative alternative communications (Doctoral Dissertation). University of California, Los Angeles, CA. Retrieved from http://escholarship.org/uc/item/7vh6c65h
   Google Scholar
• Estrin, D. (2014). Small data, where n = me. Communications of the ACM, 57, 32–34. doi:10.1145/2580944
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frayling, C. (1994). Research in Art and Design (Royal College of Art Research Papers, Vol. 1, No. 1, 1993/4). Retrieved from: http://researchonline.rca.ac.uk/id/eprint/384
   Google Scholar
• Gaver, W., Dunne, A., & Pacenti, E. (1999). Cultural probes. Interactions, 6, 21–29. doi:10.1145/291224.291235
   Google Scholar
• Goodwin, C. (1979). The interactive construction of a sentence in natural conversation. In G. Psathas (Ed.), Everyday language: Studies in ethnomethodology (pp. 97–121). New York, NY: Irvington Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Goodwin, C. (2003). The semiotic body in its environment. In J. Coupland & R. Gwyn (Eds.), Discourses of the body (pp. 19–42). New York, NY: Palgrave/Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Goodwin, C. (2007). Participation, stance and affect in the organization of activities. Discourse & Society, 18, 53–73. doi:10.1177/0957926507069457
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hennig, S. (2013). Candidacy of biosignals as an implicit input method for expressive speech synthesis (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Italian Institute of Technology, Genoa, Italy.
   Google Scholar
• Hennig, S., & Pullin, G. (2016). Tonetable – starting a hands on conversation about tone of voice in AAC. Paper presented at the International Society for Augmentative and Alternative Communication 17th biennial conference, Toronto, Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Higginbotham, D.J. (2010). Humanizing vox artificialis: The role of speech synthesis in augmentative and alternative communication. In J. W. Mullennix & S. E. Stern (Eds.), Computer synthesized speech technologies: Tools for aiding impairment (pp. 50–69). Hershey (PA): IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-61520-725-1
   Google Scholar
• Higginbotham, D.J., & Caves, K. (2002). AAC performance and usability issues: the effect of AAC technology on the communicative process. Assistive Technology, 14, 45–57. doi:10.1080/10400435.2002.10132054
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Higginbotham, D.J., & Engelke, C.R. (2013). A primer for doing talk-in-interaction research in augmentative and alternative communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 29, 3–19. doi:10.3109/07434618.2013.767556
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Higginbotham, D.J., Fulcher, K., & Seale, J. (2016). Time and timing in interactions involving individuals with ALS, their unimpaired partners and their speech generating devices. In M. M. Smith, & J. Murray (Eds.), The silent partner? Language, interaction and aided communication. Guildford, UK: J & R Press.
   Google Scholar
• Higginbotham, D.J., & Wilkins, D.P. (1999). Slipping through the timestream: Social issues of time and timing in augmented interactions. In D. Kovarsky, M. Maxwell, & J. Duchan (Eds.), Constructing (in)competence: Disabling evaluations in clinical and social interaction (pp. 49–82). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Jackson, M.C. (2006). Creative holism: A critical systems approach to complex problem situations. Systems Research, 23, 647–657. doi:10.1002/sres.799
   Google Scholar
• Jacobs, S. (2002). The electronic curb-cut effect. Developed in support of the World Bank Conference on Disability and Development. Retrieved from http://www.icdri.org/technology/ecceff.htm
   Google Scholar
• IDEO (2001). Social mobiles. Retrieved from http://p-lin-app-df-01.ideo.com/work/social-mobiles/
   Google Scholar
• Izdebski, K. (Ed.) (2009). Emotions in the human voice [Vol 1–3]. San Diego, CA: Plural.
   Google Scholar
• Lewis, L., & Treviranus, J. (2013). Public policy and the global public inclusive infrastructure project. Interactions, 20, 62–66. doi:10.1145/2510123
   Google Scholar
• Martin, B., & Hanington, B. (2012). Universal methods of design. Beverly (MA): Rockport.
   Google Scholar
• Merry Engle, S. (2016). The seductions of quantification: Measuring human rights, gender violence, and sex trafficking. Chicago (IL): University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Meyer, A., & Rose, D.H. (2005). The future is in the margins: The role of technology and disability in educational reform. In D. H. Rose, A. Meyer, & C. Hitchcock (Eds.), The universally designed classroom: Accessible curriculum and digital technologies (pp. 13–35). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
   Google Scholar
• McCorduck, P. (1994). America’s multi-mediatrix. Wired, Retrieved from: https://www.wired.com/1994/03/anderson/
   Google Scholar
• McGettigan, C. (2015). The social life of voices: Studying the neural bases for the expression and perception of the self and others during spoken communication. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 9, 1–4. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2015.00129
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mills, T., Bunnell, T.H., & Patel, R. (2014). Towards personalized speech synthesis for assistive communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 30, 226–236. doi:10.3109/07434618.2014.924026
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moggridge, B. (2006). Designing interactions. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Monk, A. (2008). Common ground in electronically mediated conversation. Synthesis Lectures on Human-Centered Informatics, 1, 1–50. doi:10.2200/S00154ED1V01Y200810HCI001
   Google Scholar
• Newell, A. (1992). Today’s dream – tomorrow’s reality (Phonic Ear AAC Distinguished Lecture). Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 8, 1–8. doi:10.1080/07434619212331276113
   Google Scholar
• Newell, C., [Producer]., & Ridley, L. [Writer]. (2012). Voice by choice [Motion Picture]. United Kingdom: University of York, Department of Theatre Film and Television. Retrieved from http://vimeo.com/46831064
   Google Scholar
• Ochs, E. (1979). Transcription as theory. In E. Ochs, & B. Schieffelin (Eds.), Developmental pragmatics (pp. 43–72). New York (NY): Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ochs, E., Graesch, A.P., Mittman, A., Bradbury, T., & Repetti, R. (2005). Video ethnography and ethnoarchaeological tracking. In M. Pitt-Catsouphes, E. E. Kossek, & S. Sweet (Eds.), The work and family handbook: Multi-disciplinary perspectives and approaches (pp. 387–409). Mahwah (NJ): Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Patel, R., & Threats, T. (2016). One’s voice: A central component of personal factors in augmentative and alternative communication. Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups SIG, 12, 94–98.10.1044/persp1.SIG12.94
   Google Scholar
• Portnuff, C. (2006). Augmentative and alternative communication: A user’s perspective. Lecture delivered at the Oregon Health and Science University. Retrieved from: http://aac-rerc.psu.edu/index-8121.php.html
   Google Scholar
• Pullin, G. (2009). Design meets disability. Cambridge (MA): The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pullin, G. (2013). 17 ways to say yes, exploring nuanced tone of voice in augmentative communication and designing new interactions with speech synthesis (Doctoral Dissertation). University of Dundee, Dundee, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Pullin, G. (2015). Participatory design and the open source voice. In D. Barney, G. Coleman, C. Ross, J. Sterne, & T. Tembeck (Eds.), The participatory condition in the digital age (pp. 101–122). Minneapolis (MN): University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pullin, G., & Cook, A. (2010). Six speaking chairs (not directly) for people who cannot speak. Interactions, 17, 38–42. doi:10.1145/1836216.1836226
   Google Scholar
• Pullin, G., & Gault, P. (2016). Imaginative and creative participatory research in AAC. Paper presented at the International Society for Augmentative and Alternative Communication 17th biennial conference, Toronto, Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Pullin, G., & Hennig, S. (2015). 17 ways to say yes: Toward nuanced tone of voice in AAC and speech technology. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 31, 170–180. doi:10.3109/07434618.2015.1037930
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robillard, A. (2006). Paralysis. In G. Albrecht (Ed.), Encyclopedia of disability (pp. 1197–1201). Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Robillard, A.B. (1999). Meaning of a disability: The lived experience of paralysis. Philadelphia (PA): Temple University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rose, T. (2015). The end of average: How we succeed in a world that values sameness. New York (NY): HarperOne.
   Google Scholar
• Sellwood, D. (2015). Bummunicator. Retrieved from http://darrylsellwood.com
   Google Scholar
• Shannon, C.E. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. The Bell System Technical Journal, 27, 379–423. doi:10.1145/584091.584093
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Treviranus, J. (2014a). Leveraging the web as a platform for economic inclusion. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 32, 94–103. doi:10.1002/bsl.2105
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Treviranus, J. (2014b). The value of the statistically insignificant. EDUCAUSE Review, 49, 46–47. Retrieved from https://er.educause.edu/articles/2014/1/the-value-of-the-statistically-insignificant
   Google Scholar
• Treviranus, J. (2016). Life-long learning on the inclusive web. Proceedings of the 13th Web for All Conference, Article 1. doi:10.1145/2899475.2899476
   Google Scholar
• Wang, M. [Director]. (2015). Inclusive [Motion Picture]. United States: Microsoft Design in partnership with Cinelan. Retrieved from www.inclusivethefilm.com
   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). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar