"Factors influencing U.S. speech and language therapists’ use of technology for clinical practice"

Professor Elizabeth Peña published an article with visiting scholar Nahar Albudoor (first author) in the International Journal of Language & Communications Disorders analyzing technology usage among speech and language therapists.
 
The title of the article “Factors influencing U.S. speech and language therapists’ use of technology for clinical practice.”
 
Peña is a certified Speech-Language Pathologist and a Fellow of the American Speech Language Hearing Association. In the UCI School of Education, she serves as Associate Dean of Faculty Development and Diversity and directs the Human Abilities in Bilingual Language Acquisition (HABLA) Lab. She also serves as co-chair of the School’s Climate Council. Peña's research interests include bilingualism, language impairment, and test development and treatment.
 
Abstract

Professor Elizabeth Peña

​There is an increasing number of technological resources available to speech and language therapists (SLTs) for use in clinical practice, but the factors that influence SLTs’ selection and use of such resources are not well understood. In related fields, technology acceptance models have been employed to explain users’ adoption of technology and to inform the advancement of empirically supported technological resources. We surveyed 209 practising SLTs in the United States representative of the speech and language membership of the American Speech–Language–Hearing Association (ASHA). Participants completed a 38‐item electronic survey representing four categories: (1) technology use, (2) technology attitudes and factors influencing technology use, (3) employment information and (4) demographics. Items measuring technology attitudes served as indicators of the research model, which mapped the primary relationships of a technology acceptance model. Survey data were collected before the Covid‐19 pandemic. The research model accounted for 66% of the variance in SLTs’ behavioural intention to use technology, which significantly and positively predicted the amount of time they reportedly spent using technology in the workplace. Subjective norms and attitudes towards technology use directly predicted the intention to use technology. Perceived usefulness and ease of use indirectly predicted intention to use technology. Survey respondents reported using technology during 48% (SD = 24%) of their overall weekly work hours on average, with a large majority reporting using technology at least once per week for planning (89% of respondents), assessment (66% of respondents) or intervention (90% of respondents). These findings statistically explain the relationships between SLTs’ attitudes and their intention to use technology for clinical practice, contributing to our understanding of why SLTs adopt certain technologies. We also detail the nature and frequency of technology use in the clinical practice of SLTs. Future directions for this work include further exploring use categories, employing direct measurements of technology use and exploring the impact of recent changes in SLT service delivery due to the Covid‐19 pandemic on SLTs’ technology attitudes.