Will AI tech like ChatGPT improve inclusion for people with communication disability?
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The potential of ChatGPT to facilitate writing and reduce inequalities is also valid for people with various disabilities, such as those using augmented alternative communication, individuals with dyslexia, ADHD, visual impairments, or speech impairments.
“This argument is also valid for people with various disabilities, such as those using augmented alternative communication (Hemsley et al., 2023), individuals with dyslexia (De Haas, 2023; Leos, 2023), ADHD (Leos, 2023;McMurtrie, 2023), visual impairments (Leos, 2023), or speech impairments (Leos, 2023).”
From Exploring the role of generative AI in higher education: Semi-structured interviews with students with disabilities (2025) · cites this paper as Hemsley et al., 2023
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Bobula, M. (2024) · Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education · doi:10.47408/jldhe.vi30.1137 · Cited by 113 · see citing works
Pierrès, O., Darvishy, A., & Christen, M. (2025) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-024-13134-8 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
- Authors
- Hemsley, B., Power, E., & Given, F.
- Affiliations
- University of Technology Sydney (AU)
- Publisher
- The Conversation Media Group Ltd
- Published
- 2023-01-19
- OpenAlex
- W4413519639
- Cited by
- 4
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1
- Type
- other
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Assistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
- Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Digital Accessibility for Disabilities
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Disability Rights and Representation
- Keywords
- ChatGPT, artificial intelligence, communication disorders, social inclusion, assistive technology, chatbots
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
