Designing habitable dialogues for speech-based interaction with computers

Abstract

Habitability refers to the match between the language people employ when using a computer system and the language that the system can accept. In this paper, the concept of &&habitability'' is explored in relation to the design of dialogues for speechbased systems. Two studies investigating the role of habitability in speech systems for banking applications are reported. The "rst study employed a speech-driven automated teller machine (ATM), using a visual display to indicate available vocabulary. Users made several distinct types of error with this system, indicating that habitability in speech systems cannot be achieved simply by displaying the input language. The second study employed a speech input/speech output home banking application, in which system constraints were indicated by either a spoken menu of words or a &&query-style'' prompt (e.g. &&what service do you require?''). Between-subjects comparisons of these two conditions con"rmed that the &&menu-style'' dialogue was rated as more habitable than the &&query-style''. It also led to fewer errors, and was rated as easier to use, suggesting that habitability is a key issue in speech system usability. Comparison with the results of the "rst study suggests that for speech input, spoken menu prompts may be more habitable than similar menus shown on a visual display. The implications of these results to system design are discussed, and some initial dialogue design recommendations are presented.

Developing speech input for virtual reality applications: A reality based interaction approach

“…This resulted in participants taking longer and using more commands to complete the task in the HMI Trial than in the HHI Trial. The notion that participants felt the machine might not understand complex commands, supports the concept of habitability between the vocabulary users employ when using a computer system and the command structure a system might recognise (Hone and Baber, 2001). When people address a machine rather than a human, they tend to use more explicit and direct questions, fewer pronouns, and a more restricted, formal, vocabulary (Richards and Underwood, 1984); short, succinct, and task specific commands (Graham et al, 1998) with up to 74% of speech commands being phrases of a few discrete words whilst only 26% are complete sentences (Lee and Billinghurst, 2008).…”

“…Previous research has illustrated that when users are limited to a specific vocabulary and under time pressure, they are likely to revert back to prelearnt or more intuitive vocabularies (Baber et al, 1996) or when under increased cognitive load, they will take longer to recall the appropriate vocabulary (Stedmon and Baber, 1999). Furthermore, the match between the language users employ when using a speech input system and the language that the system can accept, or the habitability of a system, is a key issue in system usability (Hone and Baber, 2001).…”

Mobile technology for crime scene examination

“…Furthermore, it was interesting to note that giving participants the opportunity for relatively 'free' entry (albeit constrained by specific codes) and free text description of a modus operandi, there was no obvious difference between the text in the reports produced in the different conditions. This implies that, using a constrained vocabulary that is 'habitable' to the task at hand (Hone and Baber, 2001) can lead to performance as successful as a free entry.…”

Measuring User Experience in Conversational Interfaces: A Comparison of Six Questionnaires

“…Because, it allows the creation of a fundamental design construct that can define the -visibility‖ in voice user interfaces. Hone and Baber (2001) proposed a conceptualisation of habitability in relation to semantic, syntactic, lexical, dialogue, and recognition constraints operating over user utterances. While their proposal is useful, we believe the scope of habitability to extend beyond the notions of constraints and visibility, and include 10 some other factors such as familiarity, emotional connection, and sense of agency.…”