Voice, communication technology, disability, and art: an interdisciplinary scoping review and reflection

References

• Alper, M. 2017. Giving Voice: Mobile Communication, Disability, and Inequality. Cambridge: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Arksey, H., and L. O’Malley. 2005. “Scoping Studies: Towards a Methodological Framework.” International Journal of Social Research Methodology 8 (1): 19–32. doi:10.1080/1364557032000119616.
   Google Scholar
• Ashby, C. E. 2011. “Whose "Voice" is It Anyway?: Giving Voice and Qualitative Research Involving Individuals That Type to Communicate.” Disability Studies Quarterly 31 (4). doi:10.18061/dsq.v31i4.1723.
   Google Scholar
• Barnes, C. 2003. “ What a Difference a Decade Makes: Reflections on doing “emancipatory” disability research.” Disability & Society, 18 (1): 3–17. doi:10.1080/713662197.
   Google Scholar
• Bonato, S. 2018. “Chapter 1: What is Grey Literature?” In Searching the Grey Literature: A Handbook for Searching Reports, Working Papers, and Other Unpublished Research. Lanham, 1-32, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Cachia, A. 2015. “LOUD Silence: Turning up the Volume on Deaf Voice.” The Senses and Society 10 (3): 321–340. doi:10.1080/17458927.2015.1130311.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carlson, L. 2015. “Music, Intellectual Disability, and Human Flourishing.” In Oxford Handbook of Music and Disability Studies, edited by B. Howe, S. Jenson-Moulton, N. Lerner, and J. Strauss, 37–53. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Chandler, E., K. Aubrecht, E. Ignagni, and C. Rice. 2021. “Cripistemologies of Disability Arts and Culture: Reflections on the Cripping the Arts Symposium.” Studies in Social Justice 15 (2): 170–179. doi:10.26522/ssj.v15i2.2429.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crow, L. 1996. “Including All of Our Lives: Renewing the Social Model of Disability.” In Exploring the Divide, edited by C. Barnes and G. Mercer. Leeds: The Disability Press. 55-17, https://disability-studies.leeds.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/40/library/Crow-exploring-the-divide-ch4.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Daudt, H. M. L., C. van Mossel, and J. S. Scott. 2013. “Enhancing the Scoping Study Methodology: A Large, Inter-Professional Team’s Experience with Arksey and O’Malley’s Framework.” BMC Medical Research Methodology 13 (1): 48. doi:10.1186/1471-2288-13-48.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elsahar, Y., S. Hu, K. Bouazza-Marouf, D. Kerr, and A. Mansor. 2019. “Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC) Advances: A Review of Configurations for Individuals with a Speech Disability.” Sensors 19 (8): 1911. doi:10.3390/s19081911.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ellis, K. 2019. “Interdisciplinary approaches to disability” (Ellis, Ed.). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Fox, A., and C. Sandahl. 2018. “Beyond “Cripping up”: An Introduction.” Journal of Literary & Cultural Disability Studies 12 (2): 121–127. doi:10.3828/jlcds.2018.10.
   Google Scholar
• Goodley, D. 2001. “Learning Difficulties,’ the Social Model of Disability and Impairment: Challenging Epistemologies.” Disability & Society 16 (2): 207–231. doi:10.1080/09687590120035816.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodley, D., R. Lawthom, K. Liddiard, and K. Runswick-Cole. 2019. “Provocations for Critical Disability Studies.” Disability & Society (34) (6): 972–997. doi:10.1080/09687599.2019.1566889.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• halifax, nvd., D. Fancy, J. Rinaldi, K. Rossiter, and A. Tigchelaar. 2018. “Recounting Huronia Faithfully: Attenuating Our Methodology to the ‘Fabulation’ of Truths- Telling.” Cultural Studies ↔ Critical Methodologies 18 (3): 216–227. doi:10.1177/1532708617746421.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamraie, A. 2015. “Cripping Feminist Technoscience.” Hypatia 30 (1): 307–313. doi:10.1111/hypa.12124.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamraie, A., and K. Fritsch. 2019. Crip Technoscience Manifesto. Catalyst (San Diego, Calif.) 5 (1): 1–33.
   Google Scholar
• Holliday, A. 2016. Doing and Writing Qualitative Research. 3rd ed. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, M., and M. King. 2020. “A Sonic Journey with Alex Blumer.” Canadian Theatre Review 184: 62–66. doi:10.3138/ctr.184.012.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones, C. T., and F. Cheuk. 2020. “Something is Happening: Encountering Silence in Disability Research.” Qualitative Research Journal 21 (1): 1–14. doi:10.1108/QRJ-10-2019-0078.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones, C. T., C. Rice, M. Lam, E. Chandler, and K. Jiwon Lee. 2021. “Toward TechnoAccess: A Narrative Review of Disabled and Aging Experiences of Using Technology to Access the Arts.” Technology in Society 65, 1–11.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones, C. T., J. Weber, A. Atwal, and H. Pridmore. Forthcoming. “Dinner Table Experience in the Flyover Provinces: A Bricolage of Rural Deaf and Disabled Artistry in Saskatchewan.” Social Science
   Google Scholar
• Kafer, A. 2013. Feminist, queer, crip. Indiana University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kafer, A. 2021. “After Crip, Crip Afters.” The South Atlantic Quarterly, 120 (2): 415–434. doi:10.1215/00382876-8916158
   Google Scholar
• Kittay, E., and L. Carlson. 2009. “Cognitive Disability and Its Challenge to Moral Philosophy.” Metaphilosophy 40 (3–4): 309–330.
   Google Scholar
• Kuppers, P. 2019. Disability Arts and Culture: Methods and Approaches. Bristol: Intellect.
   Google Scholar
• Kuppers, P., S. Heit, A. Sizemore-Barber, V. K. Preston, A. Hickey, and A. Wille. 2016. “Mad Methodologies and Community Performance: The Asylum Project at Bedlam.” Theatre Topics 26 (2): 221–237. doi:10.1353/tt.2016.0032.
   Google Scholar
• Leduc, V., M. Boukala, J. Rouleau, A. Louw, A. McAskill, C. Théroux, S. Heussaff, et al. 2020. Deaf and Disability Arts Practices in Canada. Research Report. Montreal: Canada: Canada Council for the Arts.
   Google Scholar
• Leavy, P. 2015. Method meets art: arts-based research practice (Second edition.). The Guilford Press. American Psychological Association.
   Google Scholar
• Levy, S., and H. Young. 2020. “Arts, Disability and Crip Theory: Temporal Re-Imagining in Social Care for People with Profound and Multiple Learning Disabilities.” Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research 22 (1): 68–79. doi:10.16993/sjdr.620.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mapley, H. 2017. “Comment from the Field: The Voice of Disability, Seminar Series, Centre for Culture and Disability Studies, Liverpool Hope University.” Journal of Literary & Cultural Disability Studies 11 (1): 99–101. doi:10.3828/jlcds.2017.7.
   Google Scholar
• McCarthy, J., and J. Light. 2001. “Instructional Effectiveness of an Integrated Theatre Arts Program for Children Using Augmentative and Alternative Communication and Their Nondisabled Peers: Preliminary Study.” Augmentative and Alternative Communication 17 (2): 88–98. doi:10.1080/aac.17.2.88.98.
   Google Scholar
• McKelvey, P. 2019. “A Disabled Actor Prepares: Stanislavsky, Disability, and Work at the National Theatre Workshop of the Handicapped.” Theatre Journal 71 (1): 69–89. doi:10.1353/tj.2019.0004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Munn, Z., M. Peters, C. Stern, C. Tufanaru, A. McArthur, and E. Aromataris. 2018. “Systemic Review or Scoping Review? Guidance for Authors When Choosing between a Systemic or Scoping Review Approach.” BMC Medical Research Methodology 18 (1): 143–147. doi:10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Netchitailova, E. 2019. “The Mystery of Madness through Art and Mad Studies.” Disability & Society 34 (9-10): 1509–1515. doi:10.1080/09687599.2019.1619236.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oliver, M. 1983. Social Work with Disabled People. Basingstoke: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Orsini, M., and C. Kelly. 2016. Mobilizing Metaphor: Art, Culture, and Disability Activism in Canada. Vancouver: UBC Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pham, M. T., A. Rajić, J. D. Greig, J. M. Sargeant, A. Papadopoulos, and S. A. McEwen. 2014. “A Scoping Review of Scoping Reviews: Advancing the Approach and Enhancing the Consistency.” Research Synthesis Methods 5 (4): 371–385. 10.1002/jrsm.1123.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pullin, G., J. Treviranus, R. Patel, and J. Higginbotham. 2017. “Designing Interaction, Voice, and Inclusion in AAC Research.” Augmentative and Alternative Communication (Baltimore, Md. : 1985) 33 (3): 139–148. 10.1080/07434618.2017.1342690.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rangan, P. 2017. “Audibilities: Voice and Listening in the Penumbra of Documentary: An Introduction.” Discourse 39 (3): 279–291. doi:10.13110/discourse.39.3.0279.
   Google Scholar
• Reid, J. 2016. “Cripping the Arts: It’s About Time.” Canadian Art. https://canadianart.ca/features/cripping-arts-time/
   Google Scholar
• Rice, C., E. Chandler, E. Harrison, K. Liddiard, and M. Ferrari. 2015. “Project ReVision: Disability at the Edges of Representation.” Disability & Society 30 (4): 513–527. doi:10.1080/09687599.2015.1037950.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ryan, C., H. Hesselgreaves, O. Wu, J. Paul, J. Dixon-Hughes, and J. D. Moss. 2018. “Protocol for a Systematic Review and Thematic Synthesis of Patient Experiences of Central Venous Access Devices in anti-Cancer Treatment.” Systematic Reviews 7 (1): 61. 10.1186/s13643-018-0721-x.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Samuels, K. 2015. “The Meanings in Making: Openness, Technology and Inclusive Music Practices for People with Disabilities.” Leonardo Music Journal 25: 25–29. doi:10.1162/LMJ_a_00929.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmidt, Y. 2018. “Disability and Postdramatic Theater: Return of Storytelling.” Journal of Literary & Cultural Disability Studies 12 (2): 203–219. doi:10.3828/jlcds.2018.15.
   Google Scholar
• Schreier, M. 2012. Qualitative Content Analysis in Practice. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Sheppard, A. 2019. “Staging Bodies, Performing Ramps: Cultural, Aesthetic Disability Technoscience.” Catalyst (San Diego, Calif.) 5 (1): 1–12. doi:10.28968/cftt.v5i1.30459.
   Google Scholar
• Siebers, T. 2005. “Disability Aesthetics.” PMLA: Publications of the Modern Language Association of America 120 (5): 524–546. doi:10.1632/S0030812900167860.
   Google Scholar
• Sins Invalid. 2015. “10 Principles of Disability Justice.” Accessed 6 April 2022. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5bed3674f8370ad8c02efd9a/t/5f1f0783916d8a179c46126d/1595869064521/10_Principles_of_DJ-2ndEd.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Snoddon, K., and J. Weber. 2020. “Commentary: Shapes and Sites of Deaf People’s Transinstitutionalization.” Canadian Journal of Disability Studies 9 (3): 16–27. doi:10.15353/cjds.v9i3.
   Google Scholar
• Snyder, S., and D. Mitchell. 2006. “Part III: Institutionalizing Disability Studies.” In Cultural Locations of Disability, 185–235. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. doi:10.7208/chicago/9780226767307.003.0007.
   Google Scholar
• St. Pierre, J. 2015. “Cripping Communication: Speech, Disability, and Exclusion in Liberal Humanist and Posthumanist Discourse.” Communication Theory 25 (3): 330–348. doi:10.1111/comt.12054.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sterne, J. 2019. “Ballad of the Dork-o-Phone: Towards a Crip Vocal Technoscience.” Journal of Interdisciplinary Voice Studies 4 (2): 179–189. doi:10.1386/jivs_00004_1.
   Google Scholar
• Temple Jones, C., Collins, K., & Zbitnew, A. 2022. “Accessibility as Aesthetic in Broadcast Media: Critical Access Theory and Disability Justice as Project-Based Learning.” Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 77 (1), 24–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/10776958211000198
   Google Scholar
• Tricco, Andrea C., Erin Lillie, Wasifa Zarin, Kelly O’Brien, Heather Colquhoun, Monika Kastner, Danielle Levac, et al. 2016. “A Scoping Review on the Conduct and Reporting of Scoping Reviews.” BMC Medical Research Methodology 16 (1): 15–15. 10.1186/s12874-016-0116-4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Warren, K. 2018. “Sound Technologies as Agency-Granting Prosthesis to Vocal Body.” Leonardo Music Journal 28: 30–33. doi:10.1162/lmj_a_01039.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar