Reading behaviors and text-to-speech technology perceptions of people with aphasia.
Sarah E Wallace, Karen Hux, Kelly Knollman-Porter and 3 others
PMID 33724912WHAT IT FOUND
After guided practice, 87.5% of people with aphasia expressed interest in text-to-speech for reading, particularly for longer materials.
They did not anticipate using it for short texts like calendars. Individual preferences varied widely, so exposure and personal choice should drive adoption rather than assumptions.
Key findings
01Most participants (87.5%) expressed interest in using text-to-speech technology to support reading after learning about it and manipulating system features.
02Participants predicted they would use text-to-speech for lengthy materials like novels and newspapers, but not for short materials like text messages or calendars.
03Interest in text-to-speech technology grew as participants received education and opportunities to engage with the software, contrasting with low current usage rates.
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.
What it does not show
The study only examined text-to-speech systems. Other reading supports were not presented, which may have biased participants toward endorsing this specific technology. Participants were asked to predict their comprehension changes. Some people with aphasia struggle to accurately estimate their own performance on language tasks, so these predictions may not reflect actual outcomes. The study used broad categories for reading materials (e.g., 'newspapers'). It did not probe specific characteristics like text length or complexity, which are known to affect reading difficulty. The sample was small (16 participants) and consisted of people who had already tried text-to-speech at least once, so it does not represent those who have never been exposed to the technology.
Declared interests
The study was supported by the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD). The authors declared no conflicts of interest.
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret the 87.5% interest rate as evidence that text-to-speech improves reading comprehension. This study measured predicted benefit and willingness to use the technology after guided exposure, not actual reading performance. Interest may have been influenced by the novelty of the guided practice or the absence of other support options during the session.