AI, communication aids and the challenge of authentic authorship – Whose line is it anyway‽

Purpose AI and, more specifically, large language models (LLMs) have great scope for use in voice output communication aids (VOCAs), and this is being realised as the technology finds a greater foothold in mainstream systems. Design/methodology/approach In this paper we examine what we know is important in VOCA design and use the approach of casuistry to examine the potential ethical implications of the use of LLMs in VOCAs. Findings We suggest that there is relevant similarity between some potential applications of LLMs and the discredited technique of facilitated communication (FC). We highlight risks related to authorship and authenticity of the message produced by LLM-enabled VOCAs and discuss the importance of a holistic view of communication, which is multi-modal and co-constructed by all participants, generating agreed meaning with a shared understanding of where that meaning originates. We also draw attention to the potential impact of LLMs on language and communication development, where they may remove important opportunities for co-construction, correction and non-VOCA interactions that are so vital to development. Originality/value Ultimately, we recognise the potential benefits of LLMs in VOCAs but counsel against a technoableist, technology-led implementation of LLMs without due consideration of the communication needs of VOCA users. We counsel against the uncritical inclusion of LLMs within new and existing VOCAs, and encourage a deeper engagement with the ethical risks of doing so, as well as with important concepts such as authorship, humanness and user-centred design.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Enabling Technologies
Published
2025-05-19
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1108/jet-01-2025-0005
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Assistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
11.55
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

AI, communication aids and the challenge of authentic authorship – Whose line is it anyway‽

Simon Judge, J. Toogood, Katherine Broomfield, Tom Griffiths et al.
2 citations
Journal of Enabling Technologies
Assistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
11.55
article

AI, communication aids and the challenge of authentic authorship – Whose line is it anyway‽

Simon Judge, J. Toogood, Katherine Broomfield, Tom Griffiths, Laura Hrastelj
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Purpose AI and, more specifically, large language models (LLMs) have great scope for use in voice output communication aids (VOCAs), and this is being realised as the technology finds a greater foothold in mainstream systems. Design/methodology/approach In this paper we examine what we know is important in VOCA design and use the approach of casuistry to examine the potential ethical implications of the use of LLMs in VOCAs. Findings We suggest that there is relevant similarity between some potential applications of LLMs and the discredited technique of facilitated communication (FC). We highlight risks related to authorship and authenticity of the message produced by LLM-enabled VOCAs and discuss the importance of a holistic view of communication, which is multi-modal and co-constructed by all participants, generating agreed meaning with a shared understanding of where that meaning originates. We also draw attention to the potential impact of LLMs on language and communication development, where they may remove important opportunities for co-construction, correction and non-VOCA interactions that are so vital to development. Originality/value Ultimately, we recognise the potential benefits of LLMs in VOCAs but counsel against a technoableist, technology-led implementation of LLMs without due consideration of the communication needs of VOCA users. We counsel against the uncritical inclusion of LLMs within new and existing VOCAs, and encourage a deeper engagement with the ethical risks of doing so, as well as with important concepts such as authorship, humanness and user-centred design.

Journal of Enabling TechnologiesVol. 19(2)
Cardiff and Vale University Health Board (GB), North Bristol NHS Trust (GB), University of Dundee (GB), Barnsley Hospital NHS Foundation Trust (GB), Cardiff Metropolitan University (GB), University of Sheffield (GB)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
Assistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
11.55
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.