Effect of Text-to-Speech Rate on Reading Comprehension by Adults With Aphasia.

Clicks: 418
ID: 65423
2019
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #5 of 13 articles by views in American journal of speech-language pathology

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Purpose Accessing auditory and written material simultaneously benefits people with aphasia; however, the extent of benefit as well as people's preferences and experiences may vary given different auditory presentation rates. This study's purpose was to determine how 3 text-to-speech rates affect comprehension when adults with aphasia access newspaper articles through combined modalities. Secondary aims included exploring time spent reviewing written texts after speech output cessation, rate preference, preference consistency, and participant rationales for preferences. Method Twenty-five adults with aphasia read and listened to passages presented at slow (113 words per minute [wpm]), medium (154 wpm), and fast (200 wpm) rates. Participants answered comprehension questions, selected most and least preferred rates following the 1st and 3rd experimental sessions and after receiving performance feedback, and explained rate preferences and reading and listening strategies. Results Comprehension accuracy did not vary significantly across presentation rates, but reviewing time after cessation of auditory content did. Visual data inspection revealed that, in particular, participants with substantial extra reviewing time took longer given fast than medium or slow presentation. Regardless of exposure amount or receipt of performance feedback, participants most preferred the medium rate and least preferred the fast rate; rationales centered on reading and listening synchronization, benefits to comprehension, and perceived normality of speaking rate. Conclusion As a group, people with aphasia most preferred and were most efficient given a text-to-speech rate around 150 wpm when processing dual modality content; individual differences existed, however, and mandate attention to personal preferences and processing strengths.
Reference Key
hux2019effectamerican Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Hux, Karen;Brown, Jessica A;Wallace, Sarah;Knollman-Porter, Kelly;Saylor, Anna;Lapp, Erica;
Journal American journal of speech-language pathology
Year 2019
DOI
10.1044/2019_AJSLP-19-00047
URL
Keywords

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.