Semin Speech Lang
DOI: 10.1055/s-0044-1791789
Elizabeth R. Lorah
1
Curriculum & Instruction, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, Arkansas
,
Stephen MacNeil
2
Department of Computer and Information Sciences, Temple University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
,
Tara Zimmerman
4
Communication Disorders and Occupational Therapy, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, Arkansas
,
Tracy Rackensperger
3
Family and Consumer Sciences, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia
,
Christine Holyfield
4
Communication Disorders and Occupational Therapy, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, Arkansas
,
Nicolette Caldwell
4
Communication Disorders and Occupational Therapy, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, Arkansas
,
Eduard C. Dragut
2
Department of Computer and Information Sciences, Temple University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
,
Slobodan Vucetic
2
Department of Computer and Information Sciences, Temple University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
› Author Affiliations
Funding This project was funded by a Track H Convergence Accelerator grant (award number 2236352) from the National Science Foundation.
› Further Information
Also available at
![SFX Search]()
Buy Article Permissions and Reprints
Abstract
Millions of individuals who have limited or no functional speech use augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) technology to participate in daily life and exercise the human right to communication. While advances in AAC technology lag significantly behind those in other technology sectors, mainstream technology innovations such as artificial intelligence (AI) present potential for the future of AAC. However, a new future of AAC will only be as effective as it is responsive to the needs and dreams of the people who rely upon it every day. AAC innovation must reflect an iterative, collaborative process with AAC users. To do this, we worked collaboratively with AAC users to complete participatory qualitative research about AAC innovation through AI. We interviewed 13 AAC users regarding (1) their current AAC engagement; (2) the barriers they experience in using AAC; (3) their dreams regarding future AAC development; and (4) reflections on potential AAC innovations. To analyze these data, a rapid research evaluation and appraisal was used. Within this article, the themes that emerged during interviews and their implications for future AAC development will be discussed. Strengths, barriers, and considerations for participatory design will also be described.
Keywords
augmentative and alternative communication -
participatory design -
artificial intelligence
Publication History
Article published online:
15 October 2024
© 2024. Thieme. All rights reserved.
Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA
References
Andzik, N. R., & Chung, Y.-C. (2021). Augmentative and alternative communication for adults with complex communication needs: a review of single-case research. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 43(3), 182–194
Babic, B., Gerke, S., Evgeniou, T., & Cohen, I. G. (2021). Beware explanations from AI in health care. Science, 373(6552), 284–286
Berenguer, C., Martínez, E. R., De Stasio, S., & Baixauli, I. (2022). Parents' perceptions and experiences with their children's use of augmentative/alternative communication: a systematic review and qualitative meta-synthesis. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(13), 8091
Biggs, E. E., & Hacker, R. (2021). Engaging stakeholders to improve social validity: Intervention priorities for students with complex communication needs. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 37(1), 25–38
Cai, S., Venugopalan, S., Tomanek, K., Narayanan, A., Morris, M. R., & Brenner, M. P. (2022). Context-aware abbreviation expansion using large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.03767. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2205.03767.
Cai, S., Venugopalan, S., Seaver, K., Xiao, X., Tomanek, K., Jalasutram, S., . . . Brenner, M. P. (2023). Using large language models to accelerate communication for users with severe motor impairments. arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.01532. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2312.01532
Charlton, J. I. (1998). Nothing about us without us: Disability oppression and empowerment. Univ of California Press.
Connery, A., & Salsberg, J. (2024). Exploring participatory health research and its application to speech and language therapy research practices. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 59(4), 1257–1268
Dee-Price, B.-J. M., Hallahan, L., Nelson Bryen, D., & Watson, J. M. (2020). Every voice counts: exploring communication accessible research methods. Disability & Society, 36(2), 240–264
Donaldson, A. L., Corbin, E., & McCoy, J. (2021). “Everyone deserves AAC”: preliminary study of the experiences of speaking autistic adults who use augmentative and alternative communication. Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups, 6(2), 315–326
Douglas, N., Hinckley, J., Grandbois, K., Schliep, M., Wonkka, A., Oshita, J., & Feuerstein, J. (2023). How a power differential between clinicians and researchers contributes to the research-to-practice gap. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 32(2), 803–810
Forber-Pratt, A. J. (2024). Advancing and expecting inclusive research. Inclusion (Washington, D.C.), 12(1), 30–39
Göttgens, I., & Oertelt-Prigione, S. (2021). The application of human-centered design approaches in health research and innovation: a narrative review of current practices. JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 9(12), e28102
Holyfield, C., MacNeil, S., Caldwell, N., O'Neill Zimmerman, T., Lorah, E., Dragut, E., & Vucetic, S. (2024). Leveraging communication partner speech to automate augmented input for children on the autism spectrum who are minimally verbal: Prototype Development and preliminary efficacy investigation. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 33, 1174–1192
Holyfield, C., MacNeil, S., Vucetic, S., Dragut, E., Rackensperger, T., Lorah, E., Caldwell, N., & Karnes, A. (2023, January). Is the current state of natural language processing the future for AAC? [Poster Presentation]. Annual conference for the Assistive Technology Industry Association, Orlando, FL
Kim, J., & Soto, G. (2024). A comprehensive scoping review of caregivers' experiences with augmentative and alternative communication and their collaboration with school professionals. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 55(2), 607–627
Lewinski, A. A., Crowley, M. J., Miller, C., Bosworth, H. B., Jackson, G. L., Steinhauser, K., White-Clark, C., McCant, F., & Zullig, L. L. (2021). Applied rapid qualitative analysis to develop a contextually appropriate intervention and increase the likelihood of uptake. Medical Care, 59(Suppl 3), S242–S251
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, 35(1), 1–12
Lorah, E., Holyfield, C., & Kucharczyk, S. (2021). Typical preschoolers' perceptions of augmentative and alternative communication modes of a preschooler with autism spectrum disorder. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 37(1), 52–63
MacNeil, S., & Holyfield, C. (2023, November). AAC by and for the people: Adopting human-centered design practices to inform AAC design [oral presentation]. American Speech-Language-Hearing Association Conference, Boston, MA, United States
McKelvey, M., Weissling, K. S., Lund, S. K., Quach, W., & Dietz, A. (2021). Augmentative and alternative communication assessment in adults with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: results of semi-structured interviews. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 43(3), 163–171
McNall, M., & Foster-Fishman, P. G. (2007). Methods of rapid evaluation, assessment, and appraisal. American journal of evaluation, 28(2), 151-168.
McNaughton, D., Rackensperger, T., Benedek-Wood, E., Krezman, C., Williams, M. B., & Light, J. (2008). “A child needs to be given a chance to succeed”: parents of individuals who use AAC describe the benefits and challenges of learning AAC technologies. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 24(1), 43–55
Moorcroft, A., Allum, J., & Scarinci, N. (2022). Speech language pathologists' responses to the rejection or abandonment of AAC systems. Disability and Rehabilitation, 44(16), 4257–4265
Muller, M., & Druin, A. (2012). Participatory design: the third space in HCI. In: J. A. Jacko (Ed.), The Human-Computer Interaction Handbook (3rd ed., pp. 1125–1153). CRC Press
Nevedal, A. L., Reardon, C. M., Opra Widerquist, M. A., Jackson, G. L., Cutrona, S. L., White, B. S., & Damschroder, L. J. (2021). Rapid versus traditional qualitative analysis using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Implementation Science, 16(1), 67.
Quintero, C. (2022). A review: accessible technology through participatory design. Disability and Rehabilitation. Assistive Technology, 17(4), 369–375
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
Ripat, J., Verdonck, M., Gacek, C., & McNicol, S. (2019). A qualitative metasynthesis of the meaning of speech-generating devices for people with complex communication needs. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 35(2), 69–79
Sennott, S. C., Akagi, L., Lee, M., & Rhodes, A. (2019). AAC and artificial intelligence (AI). Topics in Language Disorders, 39(4), 389–403
Singh, R. P., Hom, G. L., Abramoff, M. D., Campbell, J. P., Chiang, M. F., & the AAO Task Force on Artificial Intelligence. (2020). Current challenges and barriers to real-world artificial intelligence adoption for the healthcare system, provider, and the patient. Translational Vision Science & Technology, 9(2), 45–45
Taylor, B., Henshall, C., Kenyon, S., Litchfield, I., & Greenfield, S. (2018). Can rapid approaches to qualitative analysis deliver timely, valid findings to clinical leaders? A mixed methods study comparing rapid and thematic analysis. BMJ open, 8(10), e019993.
Valencia, S., Cave, R., Kallarackal, K., Seaver, K., Terry, M., & Kane, S. K. (2023, April). “The less I type, the better”: How AI Language Models can Enhance or Impede Communication for AAC Users. In: Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1–14). Doi:
https://doi.org/10.1145/3544548.3581560
Vindrola-Padros, C., & Johnson, G. A. (2020). Rapid techniques in qualitative research: a critical review of the literature. Qualitative Health Research, 30(10), 1596–1604
Wallerstein, N., Duran, B., Oetzel, J. G., & Minkler, M. (2018). Community Based Participatory Research for Health: Advancing Social and Health Equity. Jossey-Bass Inc.
Walsh, M., Harman, I., Manning, P., Ponza, B., Wong, S., Shaw, B., Sellwood, D., Anderson, K., Reddihough, D., & Wallen, M. (2024). Including people who use augmentative and alternative communication in qualitative research: Can you hear us? International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 23, 1–13
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
Williams, K., & Holyfield, C. (2024, May). Future of AAC technologies: priorities for inclusive research and implementation [Oral presentation]. The Future of AAC Research Summit, Arlington, VA, United States
Zisk, A. H., & Dalton, E. (2019). Augmentative and alternative communication for speaking autistic adults: overview and recommendations. Autism in Adulthood: Challenges and Management, 1(2), 93–100
Comments (0)