溝通符號表徵透明度對失語症成人之影響－風格與動靜狀態初探研究

The Transparency of Communication Symbol with Aphasia Adults- A Preliminary Study on Representation Style and Status

林庭如(Ting-Ju Lin)；陳建雄(Chien-Hsiung Chen)

失語症 ； 動態 ； 線條稿 ； 靜態 ； 攝影 ； Aphasia ； Animated ； Illustration ； Static ； Photograph

設計學報

22卷4期（2017 / 12 / 01）

45 - 68

繁體中文

輔助溝通（augmentative and alternative communication, AAC）系統提供暫時或長久失去語言溝通能力的族群，在符號、輔具、策略以及技術上的服務。其中，符號被視為AAC系統的基礎，然而相關研究多數在比較各系統符號的易用性，目前幾乎鮮少提出跨越系統、針對核心字彙符號的視覺設計概念方向以供未來系統符號設計參考。因此，本研究聚焦在符號本身的表徵透明度探討（transparency；係指能理解符號意義的程度，為符號易用性中評估具象性的方法），並以成人失語症患者為研究對象。研究符號為人的關係名詞、物體名詞、動詞和形容詞各別對應的核心字彙，並請專家進行符號的啟發式評估與樣本繪製，以AAC系統符號常見攝影和線條風格和動靜狀態來做探討。結果在第一階段的四個詞類符號靜態呈現研究上發現名詞類符號的表徵透明度最高，且研究對象認為攝影風格能呈現內容細節且生動令人愉悅的圖像是重要的；相對地，動詞和形容詞類符號的表徵透明度較低。第二階段的討論則專注在前階段表徵透明度較低的動詞和形容詞上，以攝影和線條兩種風格與動靜三種狀態來探討，試圖了解動態形式是否能提高動詞和形容詞符號的表徵透明度。經紮根分析結果發現，雖然動態形式能提高大部分動詞和形容詞符號的表徵透明度，但若形容詞本身較具抽象概念或其比較性的概念無法單純依賴具象表現時，則靜態呈現的效果較動態佳。整體而言在風格表現上，以攝影風格呈現名詞時，有較佳的表徵透明度與偏好結果；以線條風格呈現動作相關詞彙時，有較佳的表徵透明度與偏好結果。從狀態的結果來看，靜態適用表現抽象概念較多的字彙，靜態加輔助線適合表現有實際軌跡的動作；而動畫形式則能提高本身含有狀態、正向互動感受字彙符號的表徵透明度。

Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC) system could offer the service of symbol, aid, technology and strategy for people with temporary or permanent communication disabilities. In the AAC system, symbol has been regarded as the fundamental element. However, most related studies have focused on the comparisons of AAC symbols within systems and few have converted forward insights to common visual design principles for future core vocabulary symbol display. Meanwhile, limited literatures have recruited aphasia adult participants who are accounted for the largest proportion of communication disorder population. Therefore, the study was concentrated on the discussion of symbol transparency (the iconicity perspective of usability) with aphasia adults. At phase I, AAC symbols were classified as personal related noun, object noun, verb and adjective with opinions from researchers. Afterwards, HCI professionals with at least five years experiences, took heuristics evaluation and designed the symbols for each word-class with static photograph and illustrated based on current AAC symbol styles. The analysis showed that the noun symbols with photograph resulted in high transparency and preference while verb and adjective symbols resulted in low transparency. Based on the improving of the verb and adjective symbol transparency and preference, without static status, the two dynamic forms of static with supplement lines and animation were also studied (three levels in total) at phase II to investigation whether the dynamic characteristics could advance the symbol transparency and preference of verb and adjective. The findings demonstrated that dynamic forms could enhance most of the verb and adjective transparency and preference, but the adjectives with abstract concepts could not rely on visual cues and neither pure static forms. To sum up, photograph could improve the noun transparency/preference and illustration could raise action transparency/preference. Moreover, static status was applied to vocabularies contained large abstract concepts. The analysis showed that static status with supplement line form was relevant to action with visible movement traces while animation form could enhance the transparency in core vocabularies featuring more conditions and positive concepts.

1. American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (ASHA) (2011). Who uses AAC. Retrieved from http://www.asha.org/public/speech/disorders/InfoAACUsers.htm
2. The Clear Communication People Ltd. (2006). Using words, photos and symbols: A practical guide to communication. Retrieved from http://www.surreypb.org.uk/section3/communication/Using%20words%20photos%20and%20symbols.pdf
3. Sigafoos, J., Schlosser, R. W., & Sutherland, D. (2010). Augmentative and Alternative Communication. In J. H. Stone, & M. Blouin (Eds.), International encyclopedia of rehabilitation. Retrieved from http://cirrie.buffalo.edu/encyclopedia/en/article/50/
4. van Tatenhove, G. (2007). Normal language development, generative language & AAC. Retrieved from http://www.vantatenhove.com/index.html
5. Baker, B., Hill, K., & Devylder, R. (2000). Core vocabulary is the same across environments. Retrieved from http://www.csun.edu/cod/conf/2000/proceedings/0259Baker.htm
6. Communication Matters (2013). Shining a light on Augmentative and Alternative Communication. Edinburgh: Communication Matters. Retrieved from http://www.communicationmatters.org.uk/shining-a-light-on-aac
7. Lambeens, T., & Pint, K. (2014). The interaction of image and text in modern comics. In A. Lardinois, S. Levie, H. Hoeken, & C. Lüthy (Eds.), Texts, transmissions, receptions modern approaches to narratives (pp. 240-257). Retrieved from http://booksandjournals.brillonline.com/content/books/b9789004270848_014/?crawler=true&mimetype=application/pdf
8. Anderson, K.,Boisvert, M. K.,Doneski-Nicol, J.,Gutmann, M. L.,Hall, N. C.,Morelock, C.,Steele, R.,Cohn, E. R.(2012).Tele-AAC Resolution.International Journal of Telerehabilitation,4(2),79-82.
9. Andrade, R. V.,Silva-Munhoz, L. de F. da,Limongi, S. C. O.(2014).The use of augmentative and alternative communication in morphosyntax intervention in adolescents with Down Syndrome.Revista CEFAC,16(3),863-873.
10. Arshad, F.,Nnamoko, N.,Wilson, J.,Roy, B.,Taylor, M.(2015).Improving healthcare system usability without real users.International Journal of Healthcare Information Systems and Informatics,10(1),67-81.
11. Babic, J.,Slivar, I.,Car, Z.,Podobnik, V.(2015).Prototype-driven software development process for augmentative and alternative communication applications.Proceedings of International Conference on Telecommunications,Graz:
12. Balandin, S.,Iacono, T.(1999).Crews, wusses, and whoppas: Core and fringe vocabularies of Australian meal-break conversations in the workplace.Augmentative and Alternative Communication,15,95-109.
13. Beck, A.,Fritz, H.(1998).Can people who have aphasia learn iconic codes?.Augmentative and Alternative Communication,14(3),184-196.
14. Bloomberg, K.,Johnson, H.(1990).A statewide demographic survey of people with severe communication impairments.Augmentative and Alternative Communication,6(1),50-60.
15. Charmaz, L.(2006).Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis.London, England:Sage.
16. Communication Matters(2011).Specialised AAC provision Commissioning national services: A model service specification.Edinburgh:Communication Matters.
17. Cook, M. P.(2006).Visual representation in science education: The influence of prior knowledge and cognitive load theory on instructional design principles.Science Education,90(6),1073-1091.
18. Corbin, J.,Strauss, A.(2007).Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory.London, England:Sage.
19. Crema, C.(2009).Augmentative and Alternative Communication in the geriatric population: A review of literature.Perspectives on Gerontology,14(2),42-46.
20. Creswell, J. W.(2013).Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches.Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
21. Cross, R. T.(2013).The value and limits of automated data logging and analysis in AAC devices.ASHA Convention,Chicago, IL.:
22. Dolić, J.,Pibernik, J.,Car, C.(2013).Design and development of symbol based services for persons with complex communication needs.Acta Graphica,24,19-28.
23. Downing, J. E.(Ed.)(2015).Teaching communication skills to students with severe disabilities.Baltimore, MD:Paul H Brookes.
24. Evans, D. G.,Bowick, L.,Johnson, M.,Blenkhorn, P.(2006).Using iconicity to evaluate symbol use.Proceedings of Computers Helping People with Special Needs,Berlin:
25. Fujisawa, K.,Inoue, T.,Yamana, Y.,Hayashi, H.(2011).The effect of animation of learning action symbols by individuals with intellectual disabilities.Augmentative and Alternative Communication,27(1),53-60.
26. Glennen, S. L.(Ed.),DeCoste, D. C.(Ed.)(1997).The handbook of Augmentative and Alternative Communication.San Diego, CA:Singular Publishing.
27. Gonasillan, A.,Bornman, J.,Harty, M.(2013).Vocabulary used by ethno-linguistically diverse South African toddlers: A parent report using the Language Development Survey.South African Journal of Communication Disorders,60,10-15.
28. Griffon, N.,Kerdelhué, G.,Hamek, S.,Hassler, S.,Boog, C.,Lamy, J. B.,Darmoni, S. J.(2014).Design and usability study of an iconic user interface to ease information retrieval of medical guidelines.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association,21(e2),270-277.
29. Harmon, A. C.,Schlosser, R. W.,Gygi, B.,Shane, H. C.,Kong, Y. Y.,Book, L.,Hearn, E.(2014).Effects of environmental sounds on the guessability of animated graphic symbols.Augmentative and Alternative Communication,30(4),298-313.
30. Hartley, S. D.,Wirz, S. L.(2002).Development of a 'communication disability model' and its implication on service delivery in low-income countries.Social Science & Medicine,54,1543-1557.
31. Higgins, D. G.,Bleasby, A. J.,Fuchs, R.(1992).CLUSTAL V: Improved software for multiple sequence alignment.Computer Applications in the Biosciences,8(2),189-191.
32. Hill, K.,Kovacs, T.,Shin, S.(2015).Critical issues using brain-computer interfaces for augmentative and alternative communication.Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation,96(3),S8-S15.
33. Jagaroo, V.,Wilkinson, K.(2008).Further considerations of visual cognitive neuroscience in aided AAC: The potential role of motion perception systems in maximizing design display.Augmentative and Alternative Communication,21(1),29-42.
34. Jokela, T.,Koivumaa, J.,Pirkola, J.,Salminen, P.,Kantola, N.(2006).Methods for quantitative usability requirements: A case study on the development of the user interface of a mobile phone.Personal Ubiquitous Computing,10(6),345-355.
35. Khowaja, K.,Salim, S. S.(2015).Heuristics to evaluate interactive systems for children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD).PLoS ONE,10(7),e0132187.
36. Kim, S.,Park, S.,Lee, S.,Lee, L.,Lee, B.,Lee, J.,You, H.(2015).Usability evaluation of graphic user interfaces for a military computer-based training system.Journal of the Ergonomics Society of Korea,34(5),401-410.
37. Koul, R.,Corwin, M.,Hayes, S.(2005).Production of graphic symbol sentences by individuals with aphasia: Efficacy of a computer-based augmentative and alternative communication intervention.Brain and Language,92(1),58-77.
38. Light, J.,Page, R.,Curran, J.,Pitkin, L.(2007).Children's ideas for the design of AAC assistive technologies for young children with complex communication needs.Augmentative and Alternative Communication,23(4),1-14.
39. Lin, T. J.,Chen, C. H.,Chen, S. C.(2012).The usability of interface for non-verbal communication.Proceedings of the 3rd International Service Innovation Design Conference,Tainan City:
40. Lindgaard, G.,Dudek, C.(2002).Aesthetic appeal versus usability: Implications for user satisfaction.2002 Human Factors Conference,Melbourne, Australia:
41. Lubas, M.,Mitchell, J.,Leo, G. D.(2014).User-centered design and augmentative and alternative communication apps for children with autism spectrum disorders.Sage Open,4(2),1-10.
42. Mankoff, J.,Hayes, G. R.,Kasnitz, D.(2010).Disability studies as a source of critical inquiry for the field of assistive technology.Proceedings of the 12th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility,New York, NY:
43. Mehl-Schneider, T. B.(2015).Recent advances in augmentative and alternative communication: The advantages and challenges of technology applications for communicative purposes.Recent advances in recent advances in assistive technologies to support children with developmental disorders,Hershey, PA:
44. Mineo, B. A.,Peischl, D.,Pennington, C.(2008).Moving targets: The effect of animation on identification of action word representations.Augmentative and Alternative Communication,24(2),162-173.
45. Mizuko, M.,Reichle, J.(1989).Transparency and recall of symbols among intellectually handicapped adults.Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders,54,627-633.
46. Mizukoa, M.(1987).Transparency and ease of learning of symbols represented by Blissymbols, PCS, and Picsyms.Augmentative and Alternative Communication,3(3),129-136.
47. Paas, F.,van Merriënboer, J.(1994).Instructional control of cognitive load in the training of complex cognitive tasks.Educational Psychology Review,6(4),351-371.
48. Petroi, D.,Koul, R. K.,Corwin, M.(2014).Effect of number of graphic symbols, levels, and listening conditions on symbol identification and latency in persons with aphasia.Augmentative and Alternative Communication,30(1),40-54.
49. Reichle, J.(Ed.),Beukelman, D.(Ed.),Light, J.(Ed.)(2002).Exemplary practices for beginning communicators: Implications for AAC.Baltimore:Paul H. Brookes.
50. Reiter, E.,Turner, R.,Alm, N.,Black, R.,Dempster, M.,Waller, A.(2009).Using NLG to help language-impaired users tell stories and participate in social dialogues.Proceedings of the 12th European Workshop on Natural Language Generation,Athens:
51. Ro, J. M.,Thomsen, A.(2014).Communication peeled and cored for the classroom!.IDEAS 2014 Conference,Glynn, GA.:
52. Ross, A. J.(1979).A study of the application of Blissymbolics as a means of communication for a young brain damaged adult.International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders,14(2),103-110.
53. Ross, A.,Winslow, I.,Marchant, P.,Brumfitt, S.(2006).Evaluation of communication, life participation and psychological well‐being in chronic aphasia: The influence of group intervention.Aphasiology,20(5),427-448.
54. Saturno, C. E.,Ramirez, A. R. G.,Conte, M. J.,Farhat, M.,Piucco, E. C.(2015).An augmentative and alternative communication tool for children and adolescents with cerebral palsy.Behaviour & Information Technology,34(6),632-645.
55. Schlosser, R. S.,Koul, R.,Shane, H.,Sorce, J.,Brock, K.,Harmon, A.,Hearna, E.(2014).Effects of animation on naming and identification across two graphic symbol sets.Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research,57(5),1779-1791.
56. Schlosser, R. W.,Koul, R. K.(2015).Speech output technologies in interventions for individuals with autism spectrum disorders: A scoping review.Augmentative and Alternative Communication,31(4),285-309.
57. Schlosser, R. W.,Shane, H.,Sorce, J.,Koul, R.,Bloomfield, E.,Debrowski, L.,Neff, A.(2012).Animation of graphic symbols representing verbs and prepositions: Effects on transparency, name agreement, and identification.Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research,55(2),342-358.
58. Schlosser, R.,Koul, R.,Fuller, D.,Shane, H.,Sorce, J.,Bloomfield, E.,Hearn, E.(2012).Effects of animation on iconicity of symbols by SLP students.American Speech-Language-Hearing Convention,Atlanta, Georgia:
59. Schwalm, N. D.,Shaviv, V.,Goldschmidt, G.(2000).Can icon animation enhance human performance. or is it just another gimmick?.Proceedings of the International Ergonomics Association & the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Congress,San Diego, CA:
60. Shane, H.,Laubscher, E. H.,Schlosser, R. W.,Flynn, S.,Sorce, J. F.,Abramson, J.(2012).Applying technology to visually support language and communication individuals with autism spectrum disorders.Journal of Autism and Development Disorders,42(6),1228-1235.
61. Smith, M. M.(2015).Language development of individuals who require aided communication: Reflections on state of the science and future research directions.Augmentative & Alternative Communication,31(3),215-233.
62. Thistle, J. J.,Wilkinson, K. M.(2015).Building evidence based practice in AAC display design for young children: Current practices and future directions.Augmentative and Alternative Communication,31(2),124-136.
63. van Weert, J. C. M.,van Noort, G.,Bol, N.,van Dijk, L.,Tates, K.,Jansen, J.(2011).Tailored information for cancer patients on the Internet: Effects of visual cues and language complexity on information recall and satisfaction.Patient Education and Counseling,84(3),368-378.
64. Worah, N.,McNaughton, D.,Light, J.,Benedek-Wood, E.(2015).A comparison of two approaches for representing AAC vocabulary for young children.International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology,16,1-10.

1. 陳思涵,陳芳宇,陳明聰(2021)。圖像編碼靜態版面與單一意義圖形符號動態版面學習成效之研究。特殊教育季刊，161，1-12。
2. 駱信昌(2021)。以青銀共創導入福祉設計實務專題課程。設計學報，26(2)，93-110。
3. 劉秉承(2018)。「城市診脈」動線系統之模擬與預測－一種基於空間型構理論動線區段分析之都市空間結構研究。設計學報，23(3)，1-21。