Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-9q27g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-19T08:44:08.288Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Computer-aided conversation: A prototype system for nonspeaking people with physical disabilities

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

John Todman ,
Norman Alm  and
Leona Elder
John Todman*
Affiliation:
University of Dundee
Norman Alm
Affiliation:
University of Dundee
Leona Elder
Affiliation:
Dundee Institute of Technology
*
John Todman, Department of Psychology, University of Dundee, Dundee DD1 4HN, Scotland
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article describes the development, use, and initial evaluation of a prototype computer system to enable nonspeaking persons with severe disabilities to engage in conversation on broad topics. The conversational aid produced (via a voice synthesizer) speech acts that were selected from a prestored menu, which was constructed by the user. Features of the system included facilities for switching the conversational perspective between the speaker and listener (i.e., “your experiences and views” vs. “my experiences and views”), providing a range of comments on what the other speaker had said, effecting repair when there was a conversational breakdown, and following predicted sequences of speech acts. The initial trials of the system produced dialogues that proceeded in a natural way and achieved encouraging conversational rates.

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 15 , Issue 1 , January 1994 , pp. 45 - 73
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1994

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Alm, N., Arnott, J. L., & Newell, A. F. (1989). Discourse analysis and pragmatics in the design of a conversation prosthesis. Journal of Medical Engineering and Technology, 13, 10–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Alm, N., Newell, A. F., & Arnott, J. L. (1992). Prediction and conversational momentum in an augmentative communication system. Communications of the ACM, 35, 46–57.Google Scholar
Baker, B. R. (1982). Minspeak. Byte, 7, 186–202.Google Scholar
Beattie, G. (1983). Talk: An analysis of speech and non-verbal behaviour in conversation. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.Google Scholar
Blackstone, S. (1991). Intervention with the partners of AAC consumers: Part I – Interaction. Augmentative Communication News, 4, 1–3.Google Scholar
Blau, A. (1986). Communication in the back-channel: Social structural analyses of nonspeech/speech conversations. Dissertation Abstracts International, 47, 3237A (University Microfilms No. 8629674).Google Scholar
Brophy-Arnott, M. B., Alm, N., Newell, A. F., & Arnott, J. L. (in press). The effect of a communication aid on the conversation of non-vocal speakers. Speech Therapy in Practice.Google Scholar
Button, G., & Casey, N. (1984). Generating topic: The use of topic initial elicitors. In Atkinson, J. M. & Heritage, J. (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 167–190). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Clark, H. L., & Wilks-Gibbs, D. (1986). Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition, 22, 1–39.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cohen, P. R. (1985). The pragmatics of referring and the modality of communication. Computational Linguistics, 10, 97–146.Google Scholar
Crystal, D. (1986). ISAAC in chains: The future of communication systems. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 2, 140–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Culp, D., Ambrosi, D., Berninger, T., & Mitchell, J. (1986). Augmentative communication aid use: A follow-up study. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 2, 19–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Demasco, P. W., & McCoy, K. F. (1992). Generating text from compressed input: An intelligent interface for people with severe motor impairments. Communications of the Association for Computing Machinery, 35, 68–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eulenberg, J. (Ed.). (1984). Conversations with non-speaking people. Toronto: Canadian Rehabilitation Council for the Disabled.Google Scholar
Fleiss, J. L. (1981). Statistical methods for rates and proportions (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Glennen, S., & Calculator, S. (1985). Training fuctional communication board use: A pragmatic approach. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 1, 134–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grice, H. (1975). Logic and conversation, In Cole, P. & Morgan, J. L. (Eds.), Syntax and semantics: Vol. 3. Speech acts. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
Grice, H. (1978). Further notes on logic and conversation. In Cole, P. (Ed.), Syntax and semantics: Vol. 7. Pragmatics. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
Gumperz, J. (1982). Discourse strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayes-Roth, B., Hayes-Roth, F., Rosenschein, S., & Cammarata, S. (1979, 08). Modelling planning as an incremental, opportunistic process. Proceedings, International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (pp. 375–383). Tokyo, Japan.Google Scholar
Hobbs, J. R., & Evans, D. A. (1980). Conversation as planned behavior. Cognitive Science, 4, 349–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, S., Jacobs, S. & Rossi, A. M. (1987). Conversational relevance: three experiments on pragmatic connectedness in conversation. In McLaughlin, M. L. (Ed.), Communication year book 10 (pp. 323–347). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Jefferson, G. (1989). Preliminary notes on a possible metric which provides for a “standard maximum” silence of approximately one second in conversation. In Roger, D. & Bull, P. (Eds.), Conversation: An interdisciplinary perspective (pp. 166–196). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Jose, P. E. (1988). Sequentiality of speech acts in conversational structure. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 17, 65–88.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kraat, A. (1985). Communication interaction between aided and natural speakers: A state of the art report. Toronto: Canadian Rehabilitation Council for the Disabled.Google Scholar
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33. 159–174.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Light, J. (1985). Communicative interaction between young nonspeaking physically disabled children and their primary caregivers: Part I – Discourse patterns; Part II – Communicative functions; Part III – Modes of communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 1, 74–83, 98–107, 125–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Light, J., Lindsay, P., Siegel, L., & Parnes, P. (1990). The effects of message encoding techniques on recall by literate adults using AAC systems. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 6, 184–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maynard, D. W. (1980). Placement of topic changes in conversation. Semiotica, 30, 263–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maynard, D. W. (1989). Perspective-display sequences in conversation. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 53, 91–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGregor, A. (1991). I'm in prison. Communication Outlook, 12, 21.Google Scholar
McLaughlin, M. L. (1984). Conversation: How talk is organized. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
McLaughlin, M. L., & Cody, M. J. (1982). Awkward silences: Behavioral antecedents and consequences of the conversational lapse. Human Communication Research, 8, 299–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merchen, M. (1990). Some reasons for being passive from a personal perspective. Communication Outlook, 12, 10–11.Google Scholar
Montgomery, J. (1982). The assisted communicator – A monograph on the use of the phonic mirror handivoice. Mill Valley, CA: Phonic Ear Inc.Google Scholar
Morris, C., Newell, A. F., Booth, L., & Arnott, J. L. (1991). Syntax PAL – A system to improve the syntax of those with language dysfunction. In Presperin, J. J. (Ed.), RESNA '91 – Proceedings of the 14th annual conference (pp. 105–106). Washington, DC: RESNA Press.Google Scholar
Mura, S. S. (1983). Licensing violations: Legitimate violations of Grice's conversational principle. In Craig, R. T. & Tracy, K. (Eds.), Conversational coherence: Form, structure, and strategy (pp. 101–115). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Newman, H. (1982). The sounds of silence in communicative encounters. Communication Quarterly, 30, 142–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nofsinger, R. E. (1991). Everyday conversation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Pettygrove, W. B. (1985). A psychosocial perspective on the glossectomy experience [Letter to the editor]. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 50, 107–109.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Phillips, B. (1991). Technology abandonment: From the consumer point of view. Washington, DC: Request Publication.Google Scholar
Prutting, C. A., & Kirchner, D. M. (1983). Applied pragmatics. In Gallagher, T. M. & Prutting, C. A. (Eds.), Pragmatic assessment and intervention issues in language (pp. 29–64). San Diego: College Hill Press.Google Scholar
Sackett, G. P. (1979). The lag sequential analysis of contingency and cydicity in behavioral interaction research. In Osofsky, J. D. (Ed.), Handbook of infant development (pp. 623–649). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50, 696–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swiffin, A. L., Arnott, J. L., Pickering, J. A. & Newell, A. F. (1987). Adaptive and predictive techniques in a communication prosthesis. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 3, 181–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Todman, J., Alm, N., & Elder, L. (1993). Facilitating conversation for multiply handicapped, non-speaking persons: A pilot study. International Journal of Rehabilitation Research, 16, 64–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vanderheiden, G., & Grilley, K. (Eds.). (1976). Non-vocal communication techniques and aids for the severely handicapped. Baltimore, MD: University Park Press.Google Scholar
Vanderheiden, G., & Kelso, D. (1987). Comparative analysis of fixed-vocabulary communication acceleration techniques. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 3, 196–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webster, J. G., Cook, A. M., Tomkins, W. J., & Vanderheiden, G. C. (Eds.). (1985). Electronic devices for rehabilitation. London: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
Weizenbaum, J. (1976). Computer power and human reason. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar
Woltosz, W. (1988). Stephen Hawking's communication system. Communication Outlook, 10, 8–11.Google Scholar
Yang, G., McCoy, K., & Demasco, P. (1990). Word prediction using a systemic tree adjoining grammar. In Presperin, J. J. (Ed.), RESNA ′90 - Proceedings of the 13th annual conference (pp. 185–186). Washington, DC: RESNA Press.Google Scholar
Yngve, V. (1970). On getting a word in edgewise. In Campbell, M. A. et al. (Eds.), Papers from the 6th regional meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society (pp. 567–577). Chicago: University of Chicago Linguistics Society.Google Scholar