SLPOtherJournal of communication disorders2021

Perceptions of people with aphasia about supporting reading with text-to-speech technology: A convergent mixed methods study.

Karen Hux, Sarah E Wallace, Jessica A Brown and 1 others

PMID 33744768

WHAT IT FOUND

Most people with aphasia were interested in text-to-speech reading support after trying it, but few used it daily.

They valued choosing the voice and speed. The biggest worry was struggling to operate the device independently, not the cost.

Key findings

01Only three participants had prior experience using text-to-speech for functional reading, but seventeen expressed interest in pursuing it after education and guided practice.

02Participants universally endorsed the ability to select a preferred voice, and a majority identified control of speech rate and highlighting as important features.

03The most frequently identified concern was technology or operation problems, with participants expressing doubt about their ability to use the system independently.

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for SLPs

Read the rest of this summary

You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.

Already have one?

What it does not show

The sample was heterogeneous in aphasia type and severity, which may have influenced perceptions of benefit. Many participants had prior exposure to TTS through previous research studies, which may have biased them toward greater interest. The study relied on self-reported perceptions and hypothetical benefits rather than measuring actual reading outcomes or functional use. The questionnaire used for quantitative data had no established validity testing.

Declared interests

The research was supported by N.I.H. Extramural funds. No other conflicts of interest were reported.

The easy way to misread this

Do not assume that interest in the technology translates to successful independent use. The study found that operational concerns were the most significant barrier, and it did not measure whether participants could actually use the devices effectively in daily life after the session.

Read it on PubMed →