Attitudes Toward Communication Modes and Message Formulation Techniques Used for Storytelling by People with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two investigations were completed regarding attitudes toward components of AAC used to tell stories by people with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (people with ALS). In Study 1, the attitudes of three groups of listeners (people with ALS, caregivers, and unfamiliar listeners) toward three communication modes (unintelligible natural speech, communication notebook, and synthesized speech) were examined. The listener groups viewed videotapes of people with ALS delivering three narratives, each with one of three different communication modes. In study 2, attitudes of three groups of listeners toward three message formulation techniques (word-by-word, sentence-by-sentence, and complete narrative) used for storytelling were examined. Listeners viewed videotapes of people with ALS using synthesized speech to tell three narratives, each with one of three different message formulation techniques. Results for both studies indicated agreement among the individuals who used AAC and listener groups, and a strong preference for AAC use by people with ALS when speech becomes unintelligible. A need for features in AAC devices allowing for larger message 'capture' and 'retrieval' capabilities is suggested.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it