Perception of synthetic and natural speech by adults with visual impairments

Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness

Volumn 103, Issue 7, 2009, Pages 403-414

  Papadopoulos, Konstantinos ^a   Koutsoklenis, Athanasios ^a   Katemidou, Evangelia ^a   Okalidou, Areti ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MACEDONIA   (Greece)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 68649114832     PISSN: 0145482X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0145482x0910300704     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Bess, F., & Humes, L. E. (1995). Audiology: The fundamentals (2nd ed.). Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins.
2. Clark, J. E. (1983). Intelligibility comparisons for two synthetic and one natural speech source. Journal of Phonetics, 11, 37-49.
3. Duffy, S. A., & Pisoni, D. B. (1992). Comprehension of synthetic speech produced by rule: A review and theoretical interpretation. Language and Speech, 35, 351-389.
4. Fucci, D., Reynolds, M. E., Bettagere, R., & Gonzales, M. D. (1995). Synthetic speech intelligibility under several experimental conditions. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 11, 113-117.
5. Greene, B. G., Logan, J. S., & Pisoni, D. B. (1986). Perception of synthetic speech produced automatically by rule: Intelligibility of eight text-to speech systems. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 18, 100-117.
6. Hensil, J., & Whittaker, S. G. (2000). Visual reading versus auditory reading by sighted persons and persons with low vision. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 94, 762-770.
7. Higginbotham, D. J., Drazek, A. L., Kowarsky, K., Scally, C., & Segal, E. (1994). Discourse comprehension of synthetic speech delivered at normal and slow presentation rates. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 10, 191-202.
8. Hoover, J., Reichle, J., VanTasell, D., & Cole, D. (1987). The intelligibility of synthesized speech: Echo II versus Votrax. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 30, 425-431.
9. Kangas, K. A., & Allen, G. D. (1990). Intelligibility of synthetic speech for normal hearing and hearing-impaired listeners. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 55, 751-755.
10. Koul, R. (2003). Synthetic speech perception in individuals with and without disabilities. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 19, 49-58.
11. Koul, R. K., & Allen, G. D. (1993). Segmental intelligibility and speech interference thresholds of high-quality synthetic speech in presence of noise. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 36, 790-798.
12. Koul, R. K., & Hanners, J. (1997). Word identification and sentence verification of two synthetic speech systems by individuals with intellectual disabilities. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 13, 99-107.
13. Logan, J. S., Greene, B. G., & Pisoni, D. B. (1989). Segmental intelligibility of synthetic speech produced by rule. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 86, 566-581.
14. Mennen, I., & Okalidou, A. (2007 Greek speech acquisition. In S. McLeon (Ed.), The international guide to speech acquisition (pp. 398-411). New York: Thompson Delmar Learning.
15. Mirenda, P., & Beukelman, D. R. (1987). A comparison of speech synthesis intelligibility with listeners from three age groups Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 3, 120-128.
16. Mirenda, P., & Beukelman, D. R. (1990). A comparison of intelligibility among natural speech and seven speech synthesizers with listeners from three age groups. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 6, 123-128.
17. Mitchell, P. R., & Atkins, C. P. (1989). A comparison of the single word intelligibility of two voice output communication aids. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 5, 84-88.
18. Papadopoulos, K., Argyropoulos, V., & Kouroupetroglou, G. (2008). Discrimination and comprehension of synthetic speech by students with visual impairments: The case of similar acoustic patterns. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 102, 426-429.
19. Ralston, J. V., Pisoni, D. B., Lively, S. E., Greene, B. G., & Mullennix, J. W. (1991). Comprehension of synthetic speech produced by rule: Word monitoring and sentence-by-sentence listening times. Human Factors, 33, 471-491.
20. Ralston, J. V., Pisoni, D. B., & Mullennix, J. W. (1989) Comprehension of synthetic speech produced by rule. In Research on speech perception, progress report no.15 (pp. 77-132). Bloomington, IN: Speech Research Laboratory, Psychology Department, Indiana University.
21. Reynolds, M. E., & Fucci, D. (1998). Synthetic speech comprehension: A comparison of children with normal and impaired language skills. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 41, 458-466.
22. Reynolds, M. E., & Jefferson, L. (1999). Natural and synthetic speech comprehension: Comparison of children from two age groups. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 15, 174-182.
23. Trimmis, N., Papadeas, E., Papadas, T., Naxakis, S., Papathanasopoulos, P., & Goumas, P. (2006). Speech audiometry: Development of modern Greek word lists for suprathreshold word-recognition-score (WRS) testing. Mediterranean Journal of Otology, 2, 117-126.