Presentation on theme: "Elizabeth K. Hanson, Ph.D., CCC-SLP University of South Dakota"— Presentation transcript:
1 Telephone Talk: Effects of Vocabulary and Timing on Telephone Conversations Using Synthesized Speech Elizabeth K. Hanson, Ph.D., CCC-SLPUniversity of South DakotaVermillion, SDCaroline Sundheimer, M.A., CFY-SLPSunshine Speech-Language Therapy ServicesPhoenix, AZISAAC - Montréal, Québec, CanadaCaroline
2 Richardson Independent School District AcknowledgementsTina LombardiRichardson Independent School DistrictDallas, TXCarolinePoster #12 ISAAC * 2008 * Montréal 07 Aug 2008, 10:10-11:00 a.m.
3 Hello? Hello! Is anybody there? Problems using SGD to talk on the phoneLimited telephone bandwidth decreases intelligibility (Milchard & Cullington (2004) )Synthesized voice intelligibility worse over the telephone than sound field (Drager, Hustad, and Gable, 2004)Timing issues…Results:Hang upRudenessUnsuccessful callCarolinePoster #12 ISAAC * 2008 * Montréal 07 Aug 2008, 10:10-11:00 a.m.
4 Hello? Hello! Is anybody there? “The telephone is perhaps my greatest source of frustration.”LizColin Portnuff, 2007Poster #12 ISAAC * 2008 * Montréal 07 Aug 2008, 10:10-11:00 a.m.
5 Attitudes Studies Japan study Content of initial message (e.g., caller can’t speak and is using synthesized speech)Timing of message delivery(e.g., 3 sec. delay)Results:Initial explanation at start improved attitudes toward callerPresence or absence of delay - no effectLizNakamura, Arima, Sakamoto, & Toyota (1993)Poster #12 ISAAC * 2008 * Montréal 07 Aug 2008, 10:10-11:00 a.m.
6 Attitudes Studies Japan/Wisconsin study Content of initial message (e.g., brief introduction and request for info)Results (comparing locations):More positive attitudes in WisconsinFewer hang-ups in WisconsinExplanatory message decreased # hang-ups in JapanLizNakamura, Vanderheiden, & Smith (1993)Poster #12 ISAAC * 2008 * Montréal 07 Aug 2008, 10:10-11:00 a.m.
7 Strategic Competence Using a “floorholder” message Light (1989b, 1989)Using a “floorholder” messagePerson using SGD starts with an explanatory message to hold the conversational floorCues communication partner to waitBedrosian, et al. (2003)Liz This idea of using an explanatory message at the beginning of a phone conversation is a demonstration of strategic competence, as defined by Light. Bedrosian and colleagues further describe such introductory messages as floorholder messages because they allow the speaker to gain or maintain the conversational floor.Poster #12 ISAAC * 2008 * Montréal 07 Aug 2008, 10:10-11:00 a.m.
8 PurposeInvestigate impact of strategic message and delay times when using synthesized speech during telephone calls.LizPoster #12 ISAAC * 2008 * Montréal 07 Aug 2008, 10:10-11:00 a.m.
9 Methods 100 telephone calls to businesses advertising in Yellow Pages USD IRB# Telephone Talk: Effects of StrategicCommunication Messages Using Synthesized Speech100 telephone calls to businesses advertising in Yellow PagesRandomly selectedAsked for business hoursCalls made during the day, to avoid contacting minorsCalls audiotaped for review & reliabilityCarolinePoster #12 ISAAC * 2008 * Montréal 07 Aug 2008, 10:10-11:00 a.m.
10 Technology Telephone: “MT4” SGD by DynaVox Systems, LLC Uniden landline telephone - speaker modeLG cellular telephone - speaker mode“MT4” SGD by DynaVox Systems, LLCVoice: DECtalk®“Betty”Speech rate: “30”Volume: “70”CarolinePoster #12 ISAAC * 2008 * Montréal 07 Aug 2008, 10:10-11:00 a.m.
11 Conditions Explanation, no delay No explanation, no delay “Please wait, I’m using a computer to talk. What are your hours? …”No explanation, no delay“What are your hours? …”Explanation, delay3-second delay “Please wait, I’m using a computer to talk…”No explanation, delay3-second delay “What are your hours?”CarolinePoster #12 ISAAC * 2008 * Montréal 07 Aug 2008, 10:10-11:00 a.m.
12 Successful call = Unsuccessful call = Dependent Variable obtained business hoursUnsuccessful call =did not obtain business hoursCarolinePoster #12 ISAAC * 2008 * Montréal 07 Aug 2008, 10:10-11:00 a.m.
13 Results Liz Two-way contingency table analysis of frequencies. Significant relation between condition and outcome.Follow up pair wise comparisons were done using Holm’s sequential Bonferroni method to control for Type 1 error at .05 level.Where was the difference?For the first comparison that was a significant difference(teal) , it was the presence or absence of the delay.For the second comparison (purple) it was both the explanation and the delay that were different.And for the third comparison (orange) that was significant, it was the delay.
14 ResultsLizWe looked at the individual contributions of the categories of unsuccessful calls.It seems the hang-up factor is most prominent here. Calls that were unsuccessful because the participant wasHostile and gave the wrong information or was simply unable to understand the speech but didn’t hang up werethe least frequent.
15 ResultsLizIf we look at only the unsuccessful calls due to hang-ups, we would expect more immediate hang-ups in the delayed conditions, because the tendency is to hang up when we answer the phone and no one is there. That plays out in one delayed condition but not the other.There were more immediate hang-ups in the NoExp+Delay condition, which is not surprising because the participant hung up when there seemed to be no one there. But that would have been the same situation in the Exp+Delay condition, so the explanation should not have made a difference since the participant didn’t wait to hear it. So our expectation plays out in one condition, but not the other.
16 Absence of explanatory message and or delayed start hurts success rate DiscussionAbsence of explanatory message and or delayed start hurts success rateStarting call immediately enhances chance of successStarting with explanatory message enhances chance of successLizThe presence or absence of that three-second delay seems to be the common factor among those conditions that were statistically significant. Although the explanation seemed to influence the outcome as well.Poster #12 ISAAC * 2008 * Montréal 07 Aug 2008, 10:10-11:00 a.m.
17 Clinical Implications Teach strategic use of floorholderTiming issue difficult to controlEffect of hostility and hang-ups on motivation to use telephoneLizPoster #12 ISAAC * 2008 * Montréal 07 Aug 2008, 10:10-11:00 a.m.
18 DECtalk® still used but not current LimitationsDifferent phonesDifferent regionsDECtalk® still used but not currentCaroline: The use of two different phones may have confounded our results.And the new generation of synthetic voices sounds more natural, which may result in different outcomes than we found using DecTALK.Poster #12 ISAAC * 2008 * Montréal 07 Aug 2008, 10:10-11:00 a.m.
19 Content of floorholder… FutureContent of floorholder…InformativeInstructionalPersonalizedStakeholder involvementModify SGD technology?Poster #12 ISAAC * 2008 * Montréal 07 Aug 2008, 10:10-11:00 a.m.
20 ReferencesBedrosian, J.L., Hoag, L.A., & McCoy, K.F. (2003). Relevance and speed of message delivery trade-offs in augmentative and alternative communication. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 46,Drager, K.D.R., Hustad, K.C., & Gable, K.L. (2004). Telephone communication: Synthetic and dysarthric speech intelligibility and listener preferences. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 20(2),Light, J. (1988). Interaction involving individuals using augmentative and alternative communication systems: State of the art and future directions. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 54(2),Light, J. (1989b). Toward a definition of communicative competence for individuals using augmentative and alternative communication systems. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 5(2),Milchard, A. J., & Cullington, H. E. (2004). An investigation into the effect of limiting the frequency of bandwidth of speech on speech recognition in adult cochlear implant users. International Journal of Audiology, 43,Nakamura, K., Arima, M., Sakamoto, A., & Toyota, R. (1993). Telephoning with a voice output device: Listener reactions. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 9,Nakamura, K., Vanderheiden, G.C., & Smith, R.O. (1993). Attitudes and impressions toward receiving phone calls made with a voice output device in the United States and Japan. Technology and Disability, 2(2),Portnuff, C. (2007). AAC: A user’s perspective. Webcast. Retrieved July 3, 2007 fromPoster #12 ISAAC * 2008 * Montréal 07 Aug 2008, 10:10-11:00 a.m.