skip to main content
10.1145/3517428.3544810acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesassetsConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

State of the Art in AAC: A Systematic Review and Taxonomy

Published: 22 October 2022 Publication History

Abstract

People with complex communication needs (CCNs) can use high-tech augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) devices and systems to compensate for communication difficulties. While many use AAC effectively, much research has highlighted challenges – for instance, high rates of abandonment and solutions which are not appropriate for their end-users. Presently, we lack a detailed survey of this field to comprehend these shortcomings and understand how the accessibility community might direct its efforts to design more effective AAC. In response to this, we conduct a systematic review and taxonomy of high-tech AAC devices and interventions, reporting results from 562 articles identified in the ACM DL and SCOPUS databases. We provide a taxonomical overview of the current state of AAC devices – e.g. their interaction modalities and characteristics. We describe the communities of focus explored, and the methodological approaches used. We contrast findings in the broader accessibility and HCI literature to delineate future avenues for exploration in light of the current taxonomy, offer a reassessment of the norms and incumbent research methodologies and present a discourse on the communities of focus for AAC and interventions.

Supplementary Material

StateOfTheArtAACCodebook.pdf - A pdf copy of the codebook used for the research. Containing all 16 categories and 85 subcodes. Data.xlsx - The dataset used for the systematic review (SR) and taxonomy, which was analysed for the results of our SR and taxonomy of high-tech AAC. To provide transparency with the reviewers and wider public. Data.csv - The dataset used for the research in .csv format to be more accessible for Linux and MacOS users. (StateOfTheArtAACCodebook.pdf)

References

[1]
Kim Adams and Al Cook. 2016. Using robots in “hands-on” academic activities: a case study examining speech-generating device use and required skills. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology 11, 5(2016), 433–443.
[2]
Kim D Adams and Albert M Cook. 2013. Programming and controlling robots using scanning on a speech generating communication device: A case study. Technology and Disability 25, 4 (2013), 275–286.
[3]
Abdullah Al Mahmud, Rikkert Gerits, and Jean-Bernard Martens. 2010. XTag: designing an experience capturing and sharing tool for persons with aphasia. In Proceedings of the 6th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Extending Boundaries. 325–334.
[4]
In North America, Pure Offices Plato Close, Tachbrook Park, and Leamington Spa. 2014. DynaVox T10/T15 User’s Guide. (2014).
[5]
Kate Anderson, Susan Balandin, and Sally Clendon. 2011. “He cares about me and I care about him.” Children’s experiences of friendship with peers who use AAC. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 27, 2 (2011), 77–90.
[6]
Rúbia EO Schultz Ascari, Roberto Pereira, and Luciano Silva. 2020. Computer vision-based methodology to improve interaction for people with motor and speech impairment. ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing (TACCESS) 13, 4 (2020), 1–33.
[7]
Rúbia EO Schultz Ascari, Luciano Silva, and Roberto Pereira. 2019. Personalized interactive gesture recognition assistive technology. In Proceedings of the 18th Brazilian Symposium on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–12.
[8]
S Aswin, Ayush Ranjan, and KV Prashanth. 2019. Smart Wearable Speaking Aid for Aphonic Personnel. In International Conference On Computational Vision and Bio Inspired Computing. Springer, 179–186.
[9]
Jon Baio. 2014. Prevalence of autism spectrum disorder among children aged 8 years-autism and developmental disabilities monitoring network, 11 sites, United States, 2010. (2014).
[10]
Dean C Barnlund. 2017. A transactional model of communication. In Communication theory. Routledge, 47–57.
[11]
Susan Baxter, Pam Enderby, Philippa Evans, and Simon Judge. 2012. Barriers and facilitators to the use of high-technology augmentative and alternative communication devices: a systematic review and qualitative synthesis. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders 47, 2(2012), 115–129.
[12]
Susan Baxter, Pam Enderby, Philippa Evans, and Simon Judge. 2012. Interventions using high-technology communication devices: a state of the art review. Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica 64, 3 (2012), 137–144.
[13]
Ann Beck, Stacey Bock, James Thompson, and Kullaya Kosuwan. 2002. Influence of communicative competence and augmentative and alternative communication technique on children’s attitudes toward a peer who uses AAC. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 18, 4 (2002), 217–227.
[14]
Hrvoje Belani. 2012. Towards a usability requirements taxonomy for mobile AAC services. In 2012 First International Workshop on Usability and Accessibility Focused Requirements Engineering (UsARE). IEEE, 36–39.
[15]
Cynthia L Bennett, Erin Brady, and Stacy M Branham. 2018. Interdependence as a frame for assistive technology research and design. In Proceedings of the 20th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility. 161–173.
[16]
Cynthia L Bennett, Burren Peil, and Daniela K Rosner. 2019. Biographical prototypes: Reimagining recognition and disability in design. In Proceedings of the 2019 on Designing Interactive Systems Conference. 35–47.
[17]
David R Beukelman, Susan Fager, Laura Ball, and Aimee Dietz. 2007. AAC for adults with acquired neurological conditions: A review. Augmentative and alternative communication 23, 3 (2007), 230–242.
[18]
David R Beukelman and Pat Mirenda. 2013. Augmentative & alternative communication: Supporting children and adults with complex communication needs. Paul H. Brookes Pub.
[19]
Elizabeth E Biggs, Erik W Carter, and Carly B Gilson. 2018. Systematic review of interventions involving aided AAC modeling for children with complex communication needs. American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities 123, 5(2018), 443–473.
[20]
Filip Bircanin, Bernd Ploderer, Laurianne Sitbon, Andrew A Bayor, and Margot Brereton. 2019. Challenges and opportunities in using augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) technologies: Design considerations for adults with severe disabilities. In Proceedings of the 31st Australian Conference on Human-Computer-Interaction. 184–196.
[21]
Alexandre Luís Cardoso Bissoli, Yves Luduvico Coelho, and Teodiano Freire Bastos-Filho. 2016. A system for multimodal assistive domotics and augmentative and alternative communication. In Proceedings of the 9th ACM International Conference on PErvasive Technologies Related to Assistive Environments. 1–8.
[22]
Rolf Black, Per Ola Kristensson, Jianguo Zhang, Annalu Waller, Sophia Bano, Zulqarnain Rashid, and Christopher Norrie. 2016. ACE-LP: Augmenting communication using environmental data to drive language prediction. In Communication Matters-CM2016 National Conference.
[23]
Rolf Black, Annalu Waller, Ross Turner, and Ehud Reiter. 2012. Supporting personal narrative for children with complex communication needs. ACM transactions on computer-human interaction (TOCHI) 19, 2(2012), 1–35.
[24]
Sarah W Blackstone, Michael B Williams, and Mick Joyce. 2002. Future AAC technology needs: consumer perspectives. Assistive Technology 14, 1 (2002), 3–16.
[25]
Jamie B Boster and John W McCarthy. 2018. Designing augmentative and alternative communication applications: The results of focus groups with speech-language pathologists and parents of children with autism spectrum disorder. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology 13, 4(2018), 353–365.
[26]
Aikaterini Bourazeri and Simone Stumpf. 2018. Co-Designing Smart Home Technology with People with Dementia or Parkinson’s Disease. In Proceedings of the 10th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (Oslo, Norway) (NordiCHI ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 609–621. https://doi.org/10.1145/3240167.3240197
[27]
LouAnne E Boyd, Alejandro Rangel, Helen Tomimbang, Andrea Conejo-Toledo, Kanika Patel, Monica Tentori, and Gillian R Hayes. 2016. SayWAT: Augmenting face-to-face conversations for adults with autism. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 4872–4883.
[28]
Jordan L Boyd-Graber, Sonya S Nikolova, Karyn A Moffatt, Kenrick C Kin, Joshua Y Lee, Lester W Mackey, Marilyn M Tremaine, and Maria M Klawe. 2006. Participatory design with proxies: developing a desktop-PDA system to support people with aphasia. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in computing systems. 151–160.
[29]
Alisa Brownlee and Lisa M Bruening. 2012. Methods of communication at end of life for the person with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Topics in Language Disorders 32, 2 (2012), 168–185.
[30]
Frederik Brudy, Christian Holz, Roman Rädle, Chi-Jui Wu, Steven Houben, Clemens Nylandsted Klokmose, and Nicolai Marquardt. 2019. Cross-device taxonomy: Survey, opportunities and challenges of interactions spanning across multiple devices. In Proceedings of the 2019 chi conference on human factors in computing systems. 1–28.
[31]
Emeline Brulé, Brianna J Tomlinson, Oussama Metatla, Christophe Jouffrais, and Marcos Serrano. 2020. Review of Quantitative Empirical Evaluations of Technology for People with Visual Impairments. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–14.
[32]
Joan Bruno and David Trembath. 2006. Use of aided language stimulation to improve syntactic performance during a weeklong intervention program. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 22, 4 (2006), 300–313.
[33]
Jessica Caron, Janice Light, Beth E Davidoff, and Kathryn DR Drager. 2017. Comparison of the effects of mobile technology AAC apps on programming visual scene displays. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 33, 4 (2017), 239–248.
[34]
Jessica Caron, Janice Light, and Kathryn Drager. 2016. Operational demands of AAC mobile technology applications on programming vocabulary and engagement during professional and child interactions. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 32, 1 (2016), 12–24.
[35]
Richard Cave and Steven Bloch. 2021. Voice banking for people living with motor neurone disease: Views and expectations. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders 56, 1(2021), 116–129.
[36]
Rosanna Yuen-Yan Chan, Eri Sato-Shimokawara, Xue Bai, Motohashi Yukiharu, Sze-Wing Kuo, and Anson Chung. 2019. A context-aware augmentative and alternative communication system for school children with intellectual disabilities. IEEE Systems Journal 14, 1 (2019), 208–219.
[37]
Flavia Chiarotti and Aldina Venerosi. 2020. Epidemiology of autism spectrum disorders: a review of worldwide prevalence estimates since 2014. Brain sciences 10, 5 (2020), 274.
[38]
Simone Ciccia, Alberto Scionti, Giacomo Vitali, and Olivier Terzo. 2020. QuadCOINS-Network: A Deep Learning Approach to Sound Source Localization. In Conference on Complex, Intelligent, and Software Intensive Systems. Springer, 130–141.
[39]
Lauren Cooper, Susan Balandin, and David Trembath. 2009. The loneliness experiences of young adults with cerebral palsy who use alternative and augmentative communication. Augmentative and alternative communication 25, 3 (2009), 154–164.
[40]
Elke Daemen, Pavan Dadlani, Jia Du, Ying Li, Pinar Erik-Paker, Jean-Bernard Martens, and Boris de Ruyter. 2007. Designing a free style, indirect, and interactive storytelling application for people with aphasia. In IFIP Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. Springer, 221–234.
[41]
Luciana Correia Lima de Faria Borges, Lucia Vilela Leite Filgueiras, Cristiano Maciel, and Vinicius Carvalho Pereira. 2012. Customizing a communication device for a child with cerebral palsy using participatory design practices: contributions towards the PD4CAT method. In Proceedings of the 11th Brazilian Symposium on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 57–66.
[42]
Denise C DeCoste. 1997. The handbook of augmentative and alternative communication. Cengage Learning.
[43]
Elizabeth Delarosa, Stephanie Horner, Casey Eisenberg, Laura Ball, Anne Marie Renzoni, and Stephen E Ryan. 2012. Family impact of assistive technology scale: Development of a measurement scale for parents of children with complex communication needs. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 28, 3 (2012), 171–180.
[44]
L Scott Doss, Peggy Ann Locke, Susan Johnston, Joe Reichle, Jeff Sigafoos, Paul Charpentier, and Dulce Foster. 1991. Initial comparison of the efficiency of a variety of AAC systems for ordering meals in fast food restaurants. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 7, 4 (1991), 256–265.
[45]
Elizabeth Ellcessor. 2010. Bridging disability divides: A critical history of web content accessibility through 2001. Information, Communication & Society 13, 3 (2010), 289–308.
[46]
Yasmin Elsahar, Sijung Hu, Kaddour Bouazza-Marouf, David Kerr, and Annysa Mansor. 2019. Augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) advances: A review of configurations for individuals with a speech disability. Sensors 19, 8 (2019), 1911.
[47]
P Enderby, S Judge, S Creer, and A John. 2013. Examining the need for, and provison of, AAC in the United Kingdom.(2013).
[48]
Annette Estes, Vanessa Rivera, Matthew Bryan, Philip Cali, and Geraldine Dawson. 2011. Discrepancies between academic achievement and intellectual ability in higher-functioning school-aged children with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of autism and developmental disorders 41, 8 (2011), 1044–1052.
[49]
Hans J Eysenck. 1994. Systematic reviews: Meta-analysis and its problems. Bmj 309, 6957 (1994), 789–792.
[50]
Torsten Felzer and Rainer Nordmann. 2008. Using intentional muscle contractions as input signals for various hands-free control applications. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Convention on Rehabilitation Engineering & Assistive Technology. 87–91.
[51]
Alexander Fiannaca, Ann Paradiso, Mira Shah, and Meredith Ringel Morris. 2017. AACrobat: Using mobile devices to lower communication barriers and provide autonomy with gaze-based AAC. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing. 683–695.
[52]
Alexander J Fiannaca, Ann Paradiso, Jon Campbell, and Meredith Ringel Morris. 2018. Voicesetting: voice authoring UIs for improved expressivity in augmentative communication. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–12.
[53]
Joseph L Fleiss and Jacob Cohen. 1973. The equivalence of weighted kappa and the intraclass correlation coefficient as measures of reliability. Educational and psychological measurement 33, 3 (1973), 613–619.
[54]
Amanda Fleury, Gloria Wu, and Tom Chau. 2019. A wearable fabric-based speech-generating device: system design and case demonstration. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology 14, 5(2019), 434–444.
[55]
Margaret Flores, Kate Musgrove, Scott Renner, Vanessa Hinton, Shaunita Strozier, Susan Franklin, and Doris Hil. 2012. A comparison of communication using the Apple iPad and a picture-based system. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 28, 2 (2012), 74–84.
[56]
Richard Foulds, Mathijs Soede, and Hans van Balkom. 1987. Statistical disambiguation of multi-character keys applied to reduce motor requirements for augmentative and alternative communication. Augmentative and alternative communication 3, 4 (1987), 192–195.
[57]
Christopher Frauenberger, Julia Makhaeva, and Katta Spiel. 2017. Blending methods: Developing participatory design sessions for autistic children. In Proceedings of the 2017 conference on interaction design and children. 39–49.
[58]
Melanie Fried-Oken, Lynn Fox, Marie T Rau, Jill Tullman, Glory Baker, Mary Hindal, Nancy Wile, and Jau-Shin Lou. 2006. Purposes of AAC device use for persons with ALS as reported by caregivers. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 22, 3 (2006), 209–221.
[59]
Melanie Fried-Oken, Aimee Mooney, Betts Peters, and Barry Oken. 2015. A clinical screening protocol for the RSVP keyboard brain–computer interface. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology 10, 1(2015), 11–18.
[60]
Julia Galliers, Stephanie Wilson, Jane Marshall, Richard Talbot, Niamh Devane, Tracey Booth, Celia Woolf, and Helen Greenwood. 2017. Experiencing EVA park, a multi-user virtual world for people with aphasia. ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing (TACCESS) 10, 4 (2017), 1–24.
[61]
Nestor Garay-Vitoria and Julio Abascal. 2004. A comparison of prediction techniques to enhance the communication rate. In ERCIM Workshop on User Interfaces for All. Springer, 400–417.
[62]
Luís Filipe Garcia, Luís Caldas De Oliveira, and David Martins De Matos. 2015. Measuring the performance of a location-aware text prediction system. ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing (TACCESS) 7, 1 (2015), 1–29.
[63]
Paola García, Eduardo Lleida, Diego Castán, José Manuel Marcos, and David Romero. 2015. Context-aware communicator for all. In International Conference on Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction. Springer, 426–437.
[64]
Miguel Gea-Megías, Nuria Medina-Medina, María Luisa Rodríguez-Almendros, and María José Rodríguez-Fórtiz. 2004. Sc@ ut: Platform for communication in ubiquitous and adaptive environments applied for children with autism. In ERCIM Workshop on User Interfaces for All. Springer, 50–67.
[65]
Amy Goldman. 2008. Funding AAC. Perspectives on Augmentative and Alternative Communication 17, 1(2008), 33–35.
[66]
Isabel Gómez, Pablo Anaya, Rafael Cabrera, Alberto Molina, Octavio Rivera, and Manuel Merino. 2010. Augmented and alternative communication system based on dasher application and an accelerometer. In International Conference on Computers for Handicapped Persons. Springer, 98–103.
[67]
Carol Goossens’. 1989. Aided communication intervention before assessment: A case study of a child with cerebral palsy. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 5, 1 (1989), 14–26.
[68]
Daniel Gorenflo and Carole Gorenflo. 1997. Effects of synthetic speech, gender, and perceived similarity on attitudes toward the augmented communicator. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 13, 2 (1997), 87–91.
[69]
Sebastian Götz. 2018. Supporting systematic literature reviews in computer science: the systematic literature review toolkit. In Proceedings of the 21st ACM/IEEE International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems: Companion Proceedings. 22–26.
[70]
Zahid Halim and Ghulam Abbas. 2015. A kinect-based sign language hand gesture recognition system for hearing-and speech-impaired: a pilot study of Pakistani sign language. Assistive Technology 27, 1 (2015), 34–43.
[71]
Foad Hamidi, Melanie Baljko, Toni Kunic, and Ray Feraday. 2014. Do-It-Yourself (DIY) assistive technology: a communication board case study. In International conference on computers for handicapped persons. Springer, 287–294.
[72]
Mark S Hawley, Pam Enderby, Phil Green, Stuart Cunningham, and Rebecca Palmer. 2006. Development of a voice-input voice-output communication aid (VIVOCA) for people with severe dysarthria. In International Conference on Computers for Handicapped Persons. Springer, 882–885.
[73]
D Jeffery Higginbotham, Gregory W Lesher, Bryan J Moulton, and Brian Roark. 2012. The application of natural language processing to augmentative and alternative communication. Assistive Technology 24, 1 (2012), 14–24.
[74]
D Jeffery Higginbotham, Howard Shane, Susanne Russell, and Kevin Caves. 2007. Access to AAC: Present, past, and future. Augmentative and alternative communication 23, 3 (2007), 243–257.
[75]
Robert A Hinde and Robert Aubrey Hinde. 1972. Non-verbal communication. Cambridge University Press.
[76]
Anthony Hogan, Megan Shipley, Lyndall Strazdins, Alison Purcell, and Elise Baker. 2011. Communication and behavioural disorders among children with hearing loss increases risk of mental health disorders. Australian and New Zealand journal of public health 35, 4 (2011), 377–383.
[77]
Christine Holyfield, Kathryn DR Drager, Jennifer MD Kremkow, and Janice Light. 2017. Systematic review of AAC intervention research for adolescents and adults with autism spectrum disorder. Augmentative and alternative communication 33, 4 (2017), 201–212.
[78]
Ming-Che Hsieh and Ching-Hsing Luo. 1999. Morse code typing training of an adolescent with cerebral palsy using microcomputer technology: case study. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 15, 4 (1999), 216–221.
[79]
Li Huang, Szu-Han Kay Chen, Shutian Xu, Yongli Wang, Xing Jin, Ping Wan, Jikang Sun, Jiming Tao, Sicong Zhang, Guohui Zhang, 2021. Augmentative and alternative communication intervention for in-patient individuals with post-stroke aphasia: study protocol of a parallel-group, pragmatic randomized controlled trial. Trials 22, 1 (2021), 1–9.
[80]
Ms Seray Ibrahim, Asimina Vasalou, and Michael Clarke. 2017. Rethinking technology design for and with children who have severe speech & physical disabilities. (2017).
[81]
Seray B Ibrahim, Asimina Vasalou, and Michael Clarke. 2018. Design opportunities for AAC and children with severe speech and physical impairments. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–13.
[82]
Rabia Jafri, Ameera Masoud Almasoud, Reema Mohammed Taj Alshammari, Shahad Eid Mohammed Alosaimi, Raghad Talal Mohammed Alhamad, and Amzan Abdullah Saleh Aldowighri. 2020. A Low-Cost Gaze-Based Arabic Augmentative and Alternative Communication System for People with Severe Speech and Motor Impairments. In International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. Springer, 279–290.
[83]
Vinoth Jagaroo and Krista Wilkinson. 2008. Further considerations of visual cognitive neuroscience in aided AAC: The potential role of motion perception systems in maximizing design display. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 24, 1 (2008), 29–42.
[84]
Roman Jakobson. 1972. Verbal communication. Scientific American 227, 3 (1972), 72–81.
[85]
Kyung Hea Jeon, Seok Jeong Yeon, Young Tae Kim, Seokwoo Song, and John Kim. 2014. Robot-based augmentative and alternative communication for nonverbal children with communication disorders. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing. 853–859.
[86]
S Jirayucharoensak, A Hemakom, W Chonnaparamutt, and P Israsena. 2011. Design and evaluation of a picture-based P300 AAC system. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Rehabilitation Engineering & Assistive Technology. 1–4.
[87]
Jeanne M Johnson, Ella Inglebret, Carla Jones, and Jayanti Ray. 2006. Perspectives of speech language pathologists regarding success versus abandonment of AAC. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 22, 2 (2006), 85–99.
[88]
Rachel Kay Johnson, Monica Strauss Hough, Kristin Ann King, Paul Vos, and Tara Jeffs. 2008. Functional communication in individuals with chronic severe aphasia using augmentative communication. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 24, 4 (2008), 269–280.
[89]
Xin-Xing Ju, Jie Yang, and Xiao-Xin Liu. 2021. A systematic review on voiceless patients’ willingness to adopt high-technology augmentative and alternative communication in intensive care units. Intensive and Critical Care Nursing 63 (2021), 102948.
[90]
Shaun K Kane, Barbara Linam-Church, Kyle Althoff, and Denise McCall. 2012. What we talk about: designing a context-aware communication tool for people with aphasia. In Proceedings of the 14th international ACM SIGACCESS conference on Computers and accessibility. 49–56.
[91]
Shaun K Kane and Meredith Ringel Morris. 2017. Let’s Talk about X: Combining image recognition and eye gaze to support conversation for people with ALS. In Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Designing Interactive Systems. 129–134.
[92]
Shaun K Kane, Meredith Ringel Morris, Ann Paradiso, and Jon Campbell. 2017. ”At times avuncular and cantankerous, with the reflexes of a mongoose” Understanding Self-Expression through Augmentative and Alternative Communication Devices. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing. 1166–1179.
[93]
Jennifer Kent-Walsh and Cathy Binger. 2018. Methodological advances, opportunities, and challenges in AAC research. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 34, 2 (2018), 93–103.
[94]
Chutisant Kerdvibulvech and Chih-Chien Wang. 2016. A new 3D augmented reality application for educational games to help children in communication interactively. In International Conference on Computational Science and Its Applications. Springer, 465–473.
[95]
Aggelos Kiayias. 2011. On the effects of pirate evolution on the design of digital content distribution systems. In International Conference on Coding and Cryptology. Springer, 223–237.
[96]
Wooseok Kim and Sangsu Lee. 2021. “I Can’t Talk Now”: Speaking with Voice Output Communication Aid Using Text-to-Speech Synthesis During Multiparty Video Conference. In Extended Abstracts of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–6.
[97]
Susan Koch Fager, Melanie Fried-Oken, Tom Jakobs, and David R Beukelman. 2019. New and emerging access technologies for adults with complex communication needs and severe motor impairments: State of the science. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 35, 1 (2019), 13–25.
[98]
Arlene W Kraat. 1987. Communication interaction between aided and natural speakers: A state of the art report. (1987).
[99]
Per Ola Kristensson, James Lilley, Rolf Black, and Annalu Waller. 2020. A design engineering approach for quantitatively exploring context-aware sentence retrieval for nonspeaking individuals with motor disabilities. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–11.
[100]
Saili S Kulkarni and Jessica Parmar. 2017. Culturally and linguistically diverse student and family perspectives of AAC. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 33, 3 (2017), 170–180.
[101]
Joanne Lasker and David R Beukelmanoe. 1999. Peers’ perceptions of storytelling by an adult with aphasia. Aphasiology 13, 9-11 (1999), 857–869.
[102]
Joseph Lau, John PA Ioannidis, and Christopher H Schmid. 1997. Quantitative synthesis in systematic reviews. Annals of internal medicine 127, 9 (1997), 820–826.
[103]
Emily Laubscher, Janice Light, and David McNaughton. 2019. Effect of an application with video visual scene displays on communication during play: Pilot study of a child with autism spectrum disorder and a peer. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 35, 4 (2019), 299–308.
[104]
Hang Li, Harrisen Scells, and Guido Zuccon. 2020. Systematic review automation tools for end-to-end query formulation. In Proceedings of the 43rd International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval. 2141–2144.
[105]
Janice Light. 1997. “Communication is the essence of human life”: Reflections on communicative competence. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 13, 2 (1997), 61–70.
[106]
Janice Light and Kathryn Drager. 2007. AAC technologies for young children with complex communication needs: State of the science and future research directions. Augmentative and alternative communication 23, 3 (2007), 204–216.
[107]
Janice Light and David McNaughton. 2012. The changing face of augmentative and alternative communication: Past, present, and future challenges., 197–204 pages.
[108]
Janice C Light, Kathryn DR Drager, and Jessica G Nemser. 2004. Enhancing the appeal of AAC technologies for young children: Lessons from the toy manufacturers. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 20, 3 (2004), 137–149.
[109]
Stephen Lindsay, Katie Brittain, Daniel Jackson, Cassim Ladha, Karim Ladha, and Patrick Olivier. 2012. Empathy, participatory design and people with dementia. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems. 521–530.
[110]
Stephen Lindsay, Daniel Jackson, Guy Schofield, and Patrick Olivier. 2012. Engaging older people using participatory design. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 1199–1208.
[111]
Kristy Logan, Teresa Iacono, and David Trembath. 2017. A systematic review of research into aided AAC to increase social-communication functions in children with autism spectrum disorder. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 33, 1 (2017), 51–64.
[112]
Kelly Mack, Emma McDonnell, Dhruv Jain, Lucy Lu Wang, Jon E. Froehlich, and Leah Findlater. 2021. What Do We Mean by “Accessibility Research”? A Literature Survey of Accessibility Papers in CHI and ASSETS from 1994 to 2019. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–18.
[113]
Jennifer Mankoff, Holly Fait, and Ray Juang. 2005. Evaluating accessibility by simulating the experiences of users with vision or motor impairments. IBM Systems Journal 44, 3 (2005), 505–517.
[114]
Jennifer Mankoff, Gillian R Hayes, and Devva Kasnitz. 2010. Disability studies as a source of critical inquiry for the field of assistive technology. In Proceedings of the 12th international ACM SIGACCESS conference on Computers and accessibility. 3–10.
[115]
Pallab K Maulik, Maya N Mascarenhas, Colin D Mathers, Tarun Dua, and Shekhar Saxena. 2011. Prevalence of intellectual disability: a meta-analysis of population-based studies. Research in developmental disabilities 32, 2 (2011), 419–436.
[116]
Auriel A May, Shakila Dada, and Janice Murray. 2019. Review of AAC interventions in persons with dementia. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders 54, 6(2019), 857–874.
[117]
M Shannon McCord and Gloria Soto. 2004. Perceptions of AAC: An ethnographic investigation of Mexican-American families. Augmentative and alternative communication 20, 4 (2004), 209–227.
[118]
Miechelle Mckelvey, David L Evans, Norimune Kawai, and David Beukelman. 2012. Communication styles of persons with ALS as recounted by surviving partners. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 28, 4 (2012), 232–242.
[119]
Deirdre McLaughlin, Betts Peters, Kendra McInturf, Brandon Eddy, Michelle Kinsella, Aimee Mooney, Trinity Deibert, Kerry Montgomery, and Melanie Fried-Oken. 2021. Decision-making for access to AAC technologies in late stage ALS. Augmentative and Alternative Communication: Challenges and Solutions (2021), 169–199.
[120]
Sharynne McLeod. 2018. Communication rights: Fundamental human rights for all. International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology 20, 1 (2018), 3–11.
[121]
David McNaughton, David Beukelman, and Patricia Dowden. 1999. Tools to support international and intercommunity collaboration in AAC research. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 15, 4 (1999), 280–288.
[122]
David McNaughton, Diane Bryen, Sarah Blackstone, Michael Williams, and Pamela Kennedy. 2012. Young adults with complex communication needs: Research and development in AAC for a “diverse” population. Assistive Technology 24, 1 (2012), 45–53.
[123]
David Mcnaughton and Diane Nelson Bryen. 2007. AAC technologies to enhance participation and access to meaningful societal roles for adolescents and adults with developmental disabilities who require AAC. Augmentative and alternative communication 23, 3 (2007), 217–229.
[124]
David McNaughton and Janice Light. 2013. The iPad and mobile technology revolution: Benefits and challenges for individuals who require augmentative and alternative communication., 107–116 pages.
[125]
David McNaughton, Tracy Rackensperger, Elizabeth Benedek-Wood, Carole Krezman, Michael B Williams, and Janice Light. 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 (2008), 43–55.
[126]
Sally Millar, Janet Scott, 1998. What is augmentative and alternative communication? An introduction. Augmentative Communication in Practice 2(1998).
[127]
Pamela Mitchell and Carolyn Atkins. 1989. A comparison of the single word intelligibility of two voice output communication aids. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 5, 2 (1989), 84–88.
[128]
Karyn Moffatt, Golnoosh Pourshahid, and Ronald M Baecker. 2017. Augmentative and alternative communication devices for aphasia: The emerging role of “smart” mobile devices. Universal Access in the Information Society 16, 1 (2017), 115–128.
[129]
Aimee Mooney, Steven Bedrick, Glory Noethe, Scott Spaulding, and Melanie Fried-Oken. 2018. Mobile technology to support lexical retrieval during activity retell in primary progressive aphasia. Aphasiology 32, 6 (2018), 666–692.
[130]
A Moorcroft, N Scarinci, and C Meyer. 2019. A systematic review of the barriers and facilitators to the provision and use of low-tech and unaided AAC systems for people with complex communication needs and their families. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology 14, 7(2019), 710–731.
[131]
Kristi L Morin, Jennifer B Ganz, Emily V Gregori, Margaret J Foster, Stephanie L Gerow, Derya Genç-Tosun, and Ee Rea Hong. 2018. A systematic quality review of high-tech AAC interventions as an evidence-based practice. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 34, 2 (2018), 104–117.
[132]
Robert R Morris, Connor R Kirschbaum, and Rosalind W Picard. 2010. Broadening accessibility through special interests: a new approach for software customization. In Proceedings of the 12th international ACM SIGACCESS conference on Computers and accessibility. 171–178.
[133]
Joan Murphy, Ivana Marková, Eleanor Moodie, Janet Scott, and Sally Boa. 1995. Augmentative and alternative communication systems used by people with cerebral palsy in Scotland: Demographic survey. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 11, 1 (1995), 26–36.
[134]
Elizabeth Murray, Patricia McCabe, and Kirrie J Ballard. 2012. A comparison of two treatments for childhood apraxia of speech: Methods and treatment protocol for a parallel group randomised control trial. BMC pediatrics 12, 1 (2012), 1–9.
[135]
NCBI. 2017. Augmentative and Alternative Communication and Voice Products and Technologies. The Promise of Assistive Technology to Enhance Activity and Work Participation; The National Academies Press: Washington, DC, USA (2017), 209–310.
[136]
Timothy Neate, Aikaterini Bourazeri, Abi Roper, Simone Stumpf, and Stephanie Wilson. 2019. Co-created personas: Engaging and empowering users with diverse needs within the design process. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 1–12.
[137]
Timothy Neate, Vasiliki Kladouchou, Stephanie Wilson, and Shehzmani Shams. 2021. Just Not Together”: The Experience of Videoconferencing for People with Aphasia during the Covid-19 Pandemic. In Just Not Together”: The Experience of Videoconferencing for People with Aphasia during the Covid-19 Pandemic. ACM.
[138]
Timothy Neate, Abi Roper, Stephanie Wilson, Jane Marshall, and Madeline Cruice. 2020. CreaTable content and tangible interaction in Aphasia. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–14.
[139]
Zeyun Niu, Wenbing Yao, Qiang Ni, and Yonghua Song. 2007. Dereq: a qos routing algorithm for multimedia communications in vehicular ad hoc networks. In Proceedings of the 2007 international conference on Wireless communications and mobile computing. 393–398.
[140]
Christopher S Norrie, Annalu Waller, and Elizabeth FS Hannah. 2021. Establishing context: AAC device adoption and support in a special-education setting. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI) 28, 2(2021), 1–30.
[141]
Mmachi G Obiorah, Anne Marie Piper, and Michael Horn. 2017. Independent Word Discovery for People with Aphasia. In Proceedings of the 19th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility. 325–326.
[142]
University of Wisconsin Hospital and Clinics. 2010. AAC Glossary of Terms.
[143]
Bernard O’Keefe, Lina Brown, and Reinhard Schuller. 1998. Identification and rankings of communication aid features by five groups. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 14, 1 (1998), 37–50.
[144]
Judith Oxley and Janet Norris. 2000. Children’s use of memory strategies: Relevance to voice output communication aid use. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 16, 2 (2000), 79–94.
[145]
Amanda M O’Brien, Ralf W Schlosser, Howard Shane, Oliver Wendt, Christina Yu, Anna A Allen, Jacqueline Cullen, Andrea Benz, and Lindsay O’Neill. 2020. Providing visual directives via a smart watch to a student with Autism Spectrum Disorder: an intervention note. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 36, 4 (2020), 249–257.
[146]
Ricardo Pais, Luís Ruano, Ofélia P Carvalho, and Henrique Barros. 2020. Global cognitive impairment prevalence and incidence in community dwelling older adults—a systematic review. Geriatrics 5, 4 (2020), 84.
[147]
Joon Sung Park, Danielle Bragg, Ece Kamar, and Meredith Ringel Morris. 2021. Designing an online infrastructure for collecting AI data from people with disabilities. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. 52–63.
[148]
Shailaja Arjun Patil. 2009. Brain gate as an assistive and solution providing technology for disabled people. In 13th International Conference on Biomedical Engineering. Springer, 1232–1235.
[149]
Kevin M Pitt and Jonathan S Brumberg. 2021. Evaluating the perspectives of those with severe physical impairments while learning BCI control of a commercial augmentative and alternative communication paradigm. Assistive Technology(2021), 1–9.
[150]
Tracy Rackensperger, Carole Krezman, David Mcnaughton, Michael B Williams, and Karen D’silva. 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 (2005), 165–186.
[151]
Joseph Reddington and Nava Tintarev. 2011. Automatically generating stories from sensor data. In Proceedings of the 16th international conference on Intelligent user interfaces. 407–410.
[152]
Ehud Reiter, Ross Turner, Norman Alm, Rolf Black, Martin Dempster, and Annalu Waller. 2009. Using NLG to help language-impaired users tell stories and participate in social dialogues. In Proceedings of the 12th European Workshop on Natural Language Generation (ENLG 2009). 1–8.
[153]
Melissa L Rethlefsen, Shona Kirtley, Siw Waffenschmidt, Ana Patricia Ayala, David Moher, Matthew J Page, and Jonathan B Koffel. 2021. PRISMA-S: an extension to the PRISMA statement for reporting literature searches in systematic reviews. Systematic reviews 10, 1 (2021), 1–19.
[154]
Laura Roche, Jeff Sigafoos, Giulio E Lancioni, Mark F O’Reilly, and Vanessa A Green. 2015. Microswitch technology for enabling self-determined responding in children with profound and multiple disabilities: A systematic review. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 31, 3 (2015), 246–258.
[155]
MaryAnn Romski, Rose A Sevcik, Andrea Barton-Hulsey, and Ani S Whitmore. 2015. Early intervention and AAC: What a difference 30 years makes. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 31, 3 (2015), 181–202.
[156]
Robert J Ruben. 2000. Redefining the survival of the fittest: communication disorders in the 21st century. The Laryngoscope 110, 2 (2000), 241–241.
[157]
Anna-Liisa Salminen, Helen Petrie, and Susan Ryan. 2004. Impact of computer augmented communication on the daily lives of speech-impaired children. Part I: Daily communication and activities. Technology and Disability 16, 3 (2004), 157–167.
[158]
Igor Schadle. 2004. Sibyl: AAC system using NLP techniques. In International Conference on Computers for Handicapped Persons. Springer, 1009–1015.
[159]
Jennifer M Seale, Ann M Bisantz, and Jeff Higginbotham. 2020. Interaction symmetry: Assessing augmented speaker and oral speaker performances across four tasks. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 36, 2 (2020), 82–94.
[160]
Andrew Sears and Vicki Hanson. 2011. Representing users in accessibility research. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems. 2235–2238.
[161]
Claude Elwood Shannon. 2001. A mathematical theory of communication. ACM SIGMOBILE mobile computing and communications review 5, 1(2001), 3–55.
[162]
Andy P Siddaway, Alex M Wood, and Larry V Hedges. 2019. How to do a systematic review: a best practice guide for conducting and reporting narrative reviews, meta-analyses, and meta-syntheses. Annual review of psychology 70 (2019), 747–770.
[163]
Jeff Sigafoos, Robert Didden, and MARK O’REILLY. 2003. Effects of speech output on maintenance of requesting and frequency of vocalizations in three children with developmental disabilities. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 19, 1 (2003), 37–47.
[164]
Rodrigo Silva and Fran Neiva. 2016. Systematic Literature Review in Computer Science - A Practical Guide. (11 2016). https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.35453.87524
[165]
Jessica Simacek, Brittany Pennington, Joe Reichle, and Quannah Parker-McGowan. 2018. Aided AAC for people with severe to profound and multiple disabilities: A systematic review of interventions and treatment intensity. Advances in Neurodevelopmental Disorders 2, 1 (2018), 100–115.
[166]
Kiley Sobel, Alexander Fiannaca, Jon Campbell, Harish Kulkarni, Ann Paradiso, Ed Cutrell, and Meredith Ringel Morris. 2017. Exploring the Design Space of AAC Awareness Displays. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 2890–2903.
[167]
Katta Spiel, Laura Malinverni, Judith Good, and Christopher Frauenberger. 2017. Participatory evaluation with autistic children. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 5755–5766.
[168]
Roger J Stancliffe, Sheryl Larson, Karen Auerbach, Joshua Engler, Sarah Taub, and K Charlie Lakin. 2010. Individuals with intellectual disabilities and augmentative and alternative communication: Analysis of survey data on uptake of aided AAC, and loneliness experiences. Augmentative and alternative communication 26, 2 (2010), 87–96.
[169]
Stephen Steward. 2009. Designing AAC interfaces for commercial brain-computer interaction gaming hardware. In Proceedings of the 11th international ACM SIGACCESS conference on Computers and accessibility. 265–266.
[170]
Katharine Still, Ruth Anne Rehfeldt, Robert Whelan, Richard May, and Simon Dymond. 2014. Facilitating requesting skills using high-tech augmentative and alternative communication devices with individuals with autism spectrum disorders: A systematic review. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders 8, 9 (2014), 1184–1199.
[171]
Arthur Theil, Lea Buchweitz, James Gay, Eva Lindell, Li Guo, Nils-Krister Persson, and Oliver Korn. 2020. Tactile board: a multimodal augmentative and alternative communication device for individuals with Deafblindness. In 19th International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Multimedia. 223–228.
[172]
Lida Theodorou, Daniela Massiceti, Luisa Zintgraf, Simone Stumpf, Cecily Morrison, Ed Cutrell, Matthew Tobias Harris, and Katja Hofmann. 2021. Disability-first Dataset Creation: Lessons from Constructing a Dataset for Teachable Object Recognition with Blind and Low Vision Data Collectors. In International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS). ACM. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/publication/disability-first-datasets/
[173]
John Todman. 2000. Rate and quality of conversations using a text-storage AAC system: Single-case training study. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 16, 3 (2000), 164–179.
[174]
John Todman, Norman Alm, Jeff Higginbotham, and Portia File. 2008. Whole utterance approaches in AAC. Augmentative and alternative communication 24, 3 (2008), 235–254.
[175]
John Todman and Pat Dugard. 1999. Accessible randomization tests for single-case and small-n experimental designs in AAC research. Augmentative and alternative communication 15, 1 (1999), 69–82.
[176]
John Todman, Leona Elder, and Norman Alm. 1995. Evaluation of the content of computer-aided conversations. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 11, 4 (1995), 229–235.
[177]
Bálint Tóth, Géza Németh, and Géza Kiss. 2004. Mobile devices converted into a speaking communication aid. In International Conference on Computers for Handicapped Persons. Springer, 1016–1023.
[178]
Kathryn Tringale, Daniel Bacher, and Leigh Hochberg. 2012. Towards the optimal design of an assistive communication interface with neural input. In 2012 38th Annual Northeast Bioengineering Conference (NEBEC). IEEE, 197–198.
[179]
Stephanie Valencia, Michal Luria, Amy Pavel, Jeffrey P Bigham, and Henny Admoni. 2021. Co-designing Socially Assistive Sidekicks for Motion-based AAC. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction. 24–33.
[180]
Stephanie Valencia, Mark Steidl, Michael Rivera, Cynthia Bennett, Jeffrey Bigham, and Henny Admoni. 2021. Aided Nonverbal Communication through Physical Expressive Objects. In The 23rd International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility. 1–11.
[181]
Mieke van de Sandt-Koenderman. 2004. High-tech AAC and aphasia: Widening horizons?Aphasiology 18, 3 (2004), 245–263.
[182]
Larah van der Meer, Jeff Sigafoos, Mark F O’Reilly, and Giulio E Lancioni. 2011. Assessing preferences for AAC options in communication interventions for individuals with developmental disabilities: A review of the literature. Research in Developmental Disabilities 32, 5 (2011), 1422–1431.
[183]
Gregg C Vanderheiden. 2003. A journey through early augmentative communication and computer access. Journal of rehabilitation research and development 39, 6; SUPP(2003), 39–53.
[184]
Keith Vertanen and Per Ola Kristensson. 2011. The imagination of crowds: conversational AAC language modeling using crowdsourcing and large data sources. In Proceedings of the 2011 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. 700–711.
[185]
Annalu Waller. 2019. Telling tales: unlocking the potential of AAC technologies. International journal of language & communication disorders 54, 2(2019), 159–169.
[186]
Annalu Waller, Rolf Black, David A O’Mara, Helen Pain, Graeme Ritchie, and Ruli Manurung. 2009. Evaluating the standup pun generating software with children with cerebral palsy. ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing (TACCESS) 1, 3 (2009), 1–27.
[187]
Annalu Waller and Alan F Newell. 1997. Towards a narrative-based augmentative communication system. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders 32, S3(1997), 289–306.
[188]
Shunfang Wang, Zicheng Cao, Mingyuan Li, and Yaoting Yue. 2019. G-DipC: an improved feature representation method for short sequences to predict the type of cargo in cell-penetrating peptides. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics 17, 3(2019), 739–747.
[189]
Janet Webster, Julie Morris, Carli Connor, Rachel Horner, Ciara McCormac, and Amy Potts. 2013. Text level reading comprehension in aphasia: What do we know about therapy and what do we need to know?Aphasiology 27, 11 (2013), 1362–1380.
[190]
Bruce H Westley and Malcolm S MacLean Jr. 1957. A conceptual model for communications research. Journalism Quarterly 34, 1 (1957), 31–38.
[191]
Mary Wickenden. 2011. Talking to teenagers: Using anthropological methods to explore identity and the lifeworlds of young people who use AAC. Communication Disorders Quarterly 32, 3 (2011), 151–163.
[192]
Krista M Wilkinson and Janice Light. 2014. Preliminary study of gaze toward humans in photographs by individuals with autism, Down syndrome, or other intellectual disabilities: Implications for design of visual scene displays. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 30, 2 (2014), 130–146.
[193]
Kristin Williams, Karyn Moffatt, Denise McCall, and Leah Findlater. 2015. Designing conversation cues on a head-worn display to support persons with aphasia. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 231–240.
[194]
Stephanie Wilson, Abi Roper, Jane Marshall, Julia Galliers, Niamh Devane, Tracey Booth, and Celia Woolf. 2015. Codesign for people with aphasia through tangible design languages. CoDesign 11, 1 (2015), 21–34.
[195]
Bruce Wisenburn and D Jeffery Higginbotham. 2008. An AAC application using speaking partner speech recognition to automatically produce contextually relevant utterances: Objective results. Augmentative and Alternative Communication 24, 2 (2008), 100–109.
[196]
Claes Wohlin. 2014. Guidelines for snowballing in systematic literature studies and a replication in software engineering. In Proceedings of the 18th international conference on evaluation and assessment in software engineering. 1–10.
[197]
Xiaoyi Zhang, Harish Kulkarni, and Meredith Ringel Morris. 2017. Smartphone-based gaze gesture communication for people with motor disabilities. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 2878–2889.

Cited By

View all
  • (2025)Assistive Technology and Alternative and Augmentative Communication Options in the Language Skills Development of Students with Specific Learning DisordersEducation Sciences10.3390/educsci1502017015:2(170)Online publication date: 1-Feb-2025
  • (2024)Interacting with Smart Virtual Assistants for Individuals with Dysarthria: A Comparative Study on Usability and User PreferencesApplied Sciences10.3390/app1404140914:4(1409)Online publication date: 8-Feb-2024
  • (2024)Predictive Anchoring: A Novel Interaction to Support Contextualized Suggestions for Grid DisplaysProceedings of the 26th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility10.1145/3663548.3688501(1-6)Online publication date: 27-Oct-2024
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. State of the Art in AAC: A Systematic Review and Taxonomy

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Conferences
    ASSETS '22: Proceedings of the 24th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility
    October 2022
    902 pages
    ISBN:9781450392587
    DOI:10.1145/3517428
    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

    Sponsors

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 22 October 2022

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. AAC
    2. Accessibility.
    3. Alternative and Augmentative Communication
    4. Systematic Review
    5. Taxonomy

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

    Conference

    ASSETS '22
    Sponsor:

    Acceptance Rates

    ASSETS '22 Paper Acceptance Rate 35 of 132 submissions, 27%;
    Overall Acceptance Rate 436 of 1,556 submissions, 28%

    Upcoming Conference

    ASSETS '25

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)577
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)71
    Reflects downloads up to 15 Feb 2025

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2025)Assistive Technology and Alternative and Augmentative Communication Options in the Language Skills Development of Students with Specific Learning DisordersEducation Sciences10.3390/educsci1502017015:2(170)Online publication date: 1-Feb-2025
    • (2024)Interacting with Smart Virtual Assistants for Individuals with Dysarthria: A Comparative Study on Usability and User PreferencesApplied Sciences10.3390/app1404140914:4(1409)Online publication date: 8-Feb-2024
    • (2024)Predictive Anchoring: A Novel Interaction to Support Contextualized Suggestions for Grid DisplaysProceedings of the 26th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility10.1145/3663548.3688501(1-6)Online publication date: 27-Oct-2024
    • (2024)Looking Past Screens: Exploring Mixed Reality and Discreet AAC DevicesProceedings of the 26th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility10.1145/3663548.3675655(1-22)Online publication date: 27-Oct-2024
    • (2024)"I Am Human, Just Like You": What Intersectional, Neurodivergent Lived Experiences Bring to Accessibility ResearchProceedings of the 26th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility10.1145/3663548.3675651(1-20)Online publication date: 27-Oct-2024
    • (2024)COMPA: Using Conversation Context to Achieve Common Ground in AACProceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613904.3642762(1-18)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
    • (2024)Breaking Badge: Augmenting Communication with Wearable AAC Smartbadges and DisplaysProceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613904.3642327(1-25)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
    • (2024)Beyond Repairing with Electronic Speech: Towards Embodied Communication and Assistive TechnologyProceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613904.3642274(1-12)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
    • (2024)Refining Text Input For Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC) Devices: Analysing Language Model Layers For OptimisationICASSP 2024 - 2024 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP)10.1109/ICASSP48485.2024.10446094(12016-12020)Online publication date: 14-Apr-2024
    • (2024)Towards Adaptive Multi-modal Augmentative and Alternative Communication for Children with CPComputers Helping People with Special Needs10.1007/978-3-031-62849-8_20(159-167)Online publication date: 5-Jul-2024
    • Show More Cited By

    View Options

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    HTML Format

    View this article in HTML Format.

    HTML Format

    Figures

    Tables

    Media

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media