The DOI matches its Crossref record, with a small difference in title or year; 156 of the 175 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The State of Speech in HCI: Trends, Themes and Challenges
Open accessAbstract
Speech interfaces are growing in popularity. Through a review of 99 research papers this work maps the trends, themes, findings and methods of empirical research on speech interfaces in the field of human–computer interaction (HCI). We find that studies are usability/theory-focused or explore wider system experiences, evaluating Wizard of Oz, prototypes or developed systems. Measuring task and interaction was common, as was using self-report questionnaires to measure concepts like usability and user attitudes. A thematic analysis of the research found that speech HCI work focuses on nine key topics: system speech production, design insight, modality comparison, experiences with interactive voice response systems, assistive technology and accessibility, user speech production, using speech technology for development, peoples’ experiences with intelligent personal assistants and how user memory affects speech interface interaction. From these insights we identify gaps and challenges in speech research, notably taking into account technological advancements, the need to develop theories of speech interface interaction, grow critical mass in this domain, increase design work and expand research from single to multiple user interaction contexts so as to reflect current use contexts. We also highlight the need to improve measure reliability, validity and consistency, in the wild deployment and reduce barriers to building fully functional speech interfaces for research.RESEARCH HIGHLIGHTS: Most papers focused on usability/theory-based or wider system experience research with a focus on Wizard of Oz and developed systems Questionnaires on usability and user attitudes often used but few were reliable or validated Thematic analysis showed nine primary research topics Challenges identified in theoretical approaches and design guidelines, engaging with technological advances, multiple user and in the wild contexts, critical research mass and barriers to building speech interfaces
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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 source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“As extensively noted in VUI literature, VUIs are not “conversational” in nature [24,25,31,36,45,83].”
From OK Google, Let's Learn: Using Voice User Interfaces for Informal Self-Regulated Learning of Health Topics among Younger and Older Adults (2023) · cites this paper as [24]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“Centred on the main dialogue actor in the breakdown-repairing process, research in repair strategies has been broadly divided into two areas: investigations into system-repair strategies and studies on user-repair strategies [10, 16].”
From System and User Strategies to Repair Conversational Breakdowns of Spoken Dialogue Systems: A Scoping Review (2024) · cites this paper as [16]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Using thematic analysis in psychology
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006) · Qualitative Research in Psychology · doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa · Cited by 194,414 · cited 2×
“Inductive Thematic Analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006) was conducted on the final search results to categorize the research themes discussed in each publication.”
Designing the user interface strategies for effective human-computer interaction
Shneiderman, B. (1998) · SIGB · doi:10.1145/25065.950626 · Cited by 4,680
Listen, attend and spell: A neural network for large vocabulary conversational speech recognition
Chan, W., Jaitly, N., Le, Q., & Vinyals, O. (2016) · 2016 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP) · doi:10.1109/icassp.2016.7472621 · Cited by 2,226
Talking about tactile experiences
Obrist, M., Seah, S. A., & Subramanian, S. (2013) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/2470654.2466220 · Cited by 1,634
Conceptual pacts and lexical choice in conversation.
Brennan, S. E., & Clark, H. H. (1996) · Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition · doi:10.1037//0278-7393.22.6.1482 · Cited by 1,529 · cited 2×
“A key debate around the role of partner models seems to be emerging in HCI based publications, which reflects debates on language production more generally (Brennan & Clark, 1996; Horton & Keysar, 1996; Keysar, Barr, & Horton, 1998).”
BackgroundBødker, S., Dindler, C., Iversen, O. S., & Smith, R. C. (2017) · CRC Press eBooks · doi:10.1201/9780203744338 · Cited by 1,517 · cited 1×
“Approaches commonly used in interaction design research such as cultural probes (DeHaemer & Wallace, 1992), contextual inquiry (Holtzblatt & Jones, 1993), and participatory design more generally (Schuler & Namioka, 1993) tended not to be used in the research we reviewed.”
MethodEmotion and sociable humanoid robots
Breazeal, C. (2003) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1016/s1071-5819(03)00018-1 · Cited by 1,279 · cited 1×
“This was to avoid studies where speech is confounded by issues of embodiment, such as gesture and emotive facial expressions (Breazeal, 2003), that can affect users’ interactions and experiences (Bruce, Nourbakhsh, & Simmons, 2002; Kuno et al., 2007).”
BackgroundLuger, E., & Sellen, A. (2016) · Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/2858036.2858288 · Cited by 1,176 · cited 5×
“Our review indicates that there has been some recent progress towards this (e.g. Luger & Sellen, 2016; Porcheron et al., 2017; Cowan et al., 2017).”
BackgroundResultInfluentialCurrent practice in measuring usability: Challenges to usability studies and research
Hornbæk, K. (2006) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2005.06.002 · Cited by 1,123
Dahlbäck, N., Jönsson, A., & Ahrenberg, L. (1993) · ACM International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI) · doi:10.1145/169891.169968 · Cited by 784 · cited 1×
“In WoZ studies participants are led to believe they are interacting with a system, however, a (usually unseen) confederate controls the system’s output (Dahlbäck, Jönsson, & Ahrenberg, 1993).”
Background
Research works printed but not linked: 10
- Bargas-avila, 2011, In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems
- Cuendet, 2013, Conference on human factors in computing systems-proceedings, 2833, 10.1145/2470654.2481392 · DOI
- Kamitis, 2016, Intelligent Personal Assistant-Products, Technologies and Market: 2017–2022
- LaPlante, 1992, Assistive technology devices and home accessibility features: prevalence, payment, need, and trends, Adv Data Vital Health Stat, 217, 1
- Munteanu, 2014, CHI’14 extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems, 1035, 10.1145/2559206.2567826 · DOI
- Nielsen, 1994, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, Proc. 3rd Annual ACM SIGGRAPH Symposium, 152, 10.1145/191666.191729 · DOI · Paper page
- Norman, 2013, The Design of Everyday Things (revised and expanded edition)
- Pearl, 2016, Designing Voice User Interfaces: Principles of Conversational Experiences
- Qvarfordt, 2003, Proceedings of the 5th international conference on Multimodal interfaces, 8
- Weinschenk, 2000, Designing Effective Speech Interfaces
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 101–200 of 227
Cowan, B. R., Clark, L., Candello, H., & Tsai, J. (2023) · Hum. Comput. Interact. · doi:10.1080/07370024.2022.2161905 · Cited by 16
“Interactions with CUIs do not entirely mimic human interaction, leading some to wonder whether the notion of “conversation” itself in this domain needs to be reframed (Clark et al., 2019b; Porcheron et al., 2018; Reeves, 2019; Stokoe et al., 2020).”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citationComputational intelligence in processing of speech acoustics: a survey
Singh, A., Kaur, N., Kukreja, V., Kadyan, V., & Kumar, M. (2022) · Complex & Intelligent Systems · doi:10.1007/s40747-022-00665-1 · Cited by 23
“Clark et al. [56] analyzed that speech human–computer interaction work focuses on nine key topics: system speech production, modality comparison, user speech production, assistive technology and accessibility, design insight, and experiences with interactive voice response (IVR) systems.”
Background“You, Move There!”: Investigating the Impact of Feedback on Voice Control in Virtual Environments
Baxter, M., Bleakley, A., Edwards, J., Clark, L., Cowan, B. R., & Williamson, J. (2021) · International Conference on Conversational User Interfaces · doi:10.1145/3469595.3469609 · Cited by 16
“As with its wider use through intelligent personal assistants in mobile phones and smart speaker devices [9, 21, 34], speech in VEs is also perceived as effective in facilitating multitasking, freeing up other modalities of control [35].”
BackgroundSelf-citationCoimagining the Future of Voice Assistants with Cultural Sensitivity
Seaborn, K., Sawa, Y., & Watanabe, M. (2024) · Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies · doi:10.1155/2024/3238737 · Cited by 15
“As Clark et al. [22] note, we can use a range of low and high fi delity approaches, including Wizard of Oz [87], where a human pretends to be the VA (iii) Embrace Deviancy .”
BackgroundMethodYou Don’t Need to Speak, You Need to Listen: Robot Interaction and Human-Like Turn-Taking
Aylett, M., & Romeo, M. (2023) · International Conference on Conversational User Interfaces · doi:10.1145/3571884.3603750 · Cited by 15
“[8] point out “A high proportion of research in our review used self-report ques-”
BackgroundSelf-citationWeber, J., Esau, M., Schiller, M. R. G., Thaden, E., Manstetten, D., & Stevens, G. (2023) · Designing Interactive Systems Conference · doi:10.1145/3563657.3595975 · Cited by 12
“Consequently, prior research focuses on the advancement of home automation in the context of intelligent assistance, including work on multimodality (cf. [42]), conversational assistance (cf. [12, 23], [45]), and the role of proac-tivity [56].”
BackgroundCyclists’ Use of Technology While on Their Bike
Porcheron, M., Clark, L., Nicholson, S., & Jones, M. (2023) · International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3544548.3580971 · Cited by 15
“While technologies with voice-based interaction are often praised for benefts [10] in the home [52], in group interactions in public spaces [54], as well during activities such as driving [31], their use by cyclists seems to be somewhat muted.”
BackgroundSelf-citationEagle, T., Blau, C., Bales, S., Desai, N., Li, V., & Whittaker, S. (2022) · ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems · doi:10.1145/3488057 · Cited by 17
“How then might we evaluate the advice provided by such CAs? While there are agreed-upon techniques for the evaluation of conversational systems [4, 42], these have been developed to evaluate task-based system performance [13], using a mix of subjective and objective metrics.”
BackgroundTennant, R., Allana, S., Mercer, K., & Burns, C. M. (2022) · JMIR Human Factors · doi:10.2196/37688 · Cited by 15
“However, this area has not yet been fully realized as a prominent means of human-computer interaction [2-4].”
BackgroundLet’s Talk About CUIs: Putting Conversational User Interface Design Into Practice
Murad, C., Munteanu, C., Cowan, B. R., Clark, L., Porcheron, M., Candello, H., Schlögl, S., Aylett, M., Sin, J., Moore, R. J., et al. (2021) · CHI Extended Abstracts · doi:10.1145/3411763.3441336 · Cited by 15
“…• Identify key design challenges in the development of CUI devices, and particularly, the tools and practices which are key to the space of developing CUIs which are not yet in existence and require more research This workshop will build upon signifcant momentum in this area [5, 7, 9, 20–23 , 28 ].”
BackgroundSelf-citationDagstuhl seminar 19461 on conversational search
Anand, A., Cavedon, L., Hagen, M., Joho, H., Sanderson, M., & Stein, B. (2020) · SIGIR Forum · doi:10.1145/3451964.3451967 · Cited by 15
Wei, C. Z., Kim, Y.-H., & Kuzminykh, A. (2023) · Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Conversational User Interfaces · doi:10.1145/3571884.3597139 · Cited by 14
“While various studies investigated how some elements of conversation architecture affect aspects of users’ perceptions or discussed the speech specifics of agents as part of a broader analysis of the state of research [11, 23], there is no comprehensive analysis of conversation architecture elements that are relevant…”
BackgroundMethodSwoboda, D., Boasen, J., Léger, P., Pourchon, R., & Sénécal, S. (2022) · Applied Sciences · doi:10.3390/app12031269 · Cited by 17
Air-Text: Air-Writing and Recognition System
Lee, S.-K., & Kim, J.-H. (2021) · ACM Multimedia · doi:10.1145/3474085.3475694 · Cited by 14
“speech [5] or brain [29], hand has been widely utilized mainly due to its intuitiveness.”
BackgroundMiranda, D., Li, C., & Darin, T. (2021) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3474705 · Cited by 14
“Although there are many robust scales, research shows that there are also many that lack reliability or validity testing [23].”
CUI@CSCW: Collaborating through Conversational User Interfaces
Porcheron, M., Clark, L., Jones, M., Candello, H., Cowan, B. R., Murad, C., Sin, J., Aylett, M., Lee, M., Munteanu, C., et al. (2020) · CSCW Companion · doi:10.1145/3406865.3418587 · Cited by 14
“A significant amount of CUI research has explored single-party interactions [3], often noting significant differences in how machine and human dialogue partners are perceived [6], how this impacts on language production in human-machine dyads [5], and how the design of existing CUI systems such as…”
BackgroundSelf-citationUnboxing Manipulation Checks for Voice UX
Seaborn, K., Rogers, K., Altmeyer, M., Watanabe, M., Sawa, Y., Nam, S., Itagaki, T., & Li, G. (2024) · Interacting with Computers · doi:10.1093/iwc/iwae062 · Cited by 11
Voorveld, H., Panteli, A., Schirris, Y., Ischen, C., Kanoulas, E., & Lentz, T. (2024) · Behavior and Information Technology · doi:10.1080/0144929x.2024.2420871 · Cited by 13
“A recent review on speech interfaces reviewing 99 papers (Clark et al. 2019) concluded, amongst others, that most papers focused on usability, and not persuasive outcomes, and are rather diverse, or even fragmented.”
User Experience of Digital Voice Assistant: Conceptualization and Measurement
Chen, Q., Gong, Y.-M., & Lu, Y.-B. (2023) · ACM Trans. Comput. Hum. Interact. · doi:10.1145/3622782 · Cited by 13
The Language Engineer: A Transversal, Emerging Role for the Automation Age
Briva-Iglesias, V., & O’Brien, S. (2022) · Quaderns de Filologia: Estudis Lingüístics · doi:10.7203/qf.0.24622 · Cited by 13
“UX research in the language services industry is not limited to interaction with MT systems, as we can see a proliferation of virtual assistants, smartphones and intelligent devices with which we communicate and interact on a daily basis (Clark et al., 2019).”
BackgroundRules Of Engagement: Levelling Up To Combat Unethical CUI Design
Mildner, T., Doyle, P. R., Savino, G.-L., & Malaka, R. (2022) · International Conference on Conversational User Interfaces · doi:10.1145/3543829.3544528 · Cited by 13
“This lack of consensus and continuity in how concepts are defined also echoes a general problem in human-machine dialogue (HMD) research, which has been highlighted in a number of recent reviews of research in the field [4, 5, 28, 29].”
BackgroundSelf-citationLosing Its Touch: Understanding User Perception of Multimodal Interaction and Smart Assistance
Esau, M., Krauß, V., Lawo, D., & Stevens, G. (2022) · Conference on Designing Interactive Systems · doi:10.1145/3532106.3533455 · Cited by 13
“Yet, post-wimp (windows, icons, mouse, pointer) interfaces like VUI [8, 24, 35] or interfaces for Mixed Realities [18] still lack a uniform and acknowledged set of such design guides, in comparison to traditional GUI-based systems.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialJung, H., Kim, H., & Ha, J.-W. (2020) · CIU · doi:10.1145/3405755.3406170 · Cited by 13
“After that, we analyzed the self-reported qualitative data, especially focusing on difficulties, and we also analyzed quantitative data from users by using the IVR usability questionnaire, Speech User Interface Service Quality (SUISQ-MR) [9, 8, 4].”
MethodToward Metaphor-Fluid Conversation Design for Voice User Interfaces
Desai, S., Chin, J., Wang, D.-K., Cowan, B. R., & Twidale, M. (2025) · International Conference on Conversational User Interfaces · doi:10.1145/3816046.3816223 · Cited by 12
“A consistent metaphorical framing provides a stable anchor for user expectations, supports long-term relationship building, and reduces the risk of disorienting users through unexpected behavioral shifts [18, 33, 34].”
Wu, Y., Porcheron, M., Doyle, P. R., Edwards, J., Rough, D., Cooney, O., Bleakley, A., Clark, L., & Cowan, B. R. (2022) · International Conference on Conversational User Interfaces · doi:10.1145/3543829.3543839 · Cited by 12
“1 Introduction Due to the growth in popularity of Intelligent Personal Assistants (IPAs) such as Google Assistant and Amazon’s Alexa, using speech as a means of interface interaction is now well established [12].”
BackgroundSelf-citationCross-Cultural Validation of Partner Models for Voice User Interfaces
Seaborn, K., Gessinger, I., Yoshida, S., Cowan, B. R., & Doyle, P. R. (2024) · ACM Conference on Conversational User Interfaces (CUI) · doi:10.1145/3640794.3665537 · Cited by 9
“Much effort has gone into identifying and realizing ideal forms of engagement and user experience (UX) with these technologies [17, 63], whilst also understanding people’s perceptions of VUIs as dialogue partners [21, 24], termed partner models [13, 14, 21, 24].”
BackgroundSelf-citationEvaluation of voice commands for mode change in virtual reality implant planning procedure
Rantamaa, H.-R., Kangas, J., Jordan, M., Mehtonen, H., Mäkelä, J., Ronkainen, K., Turunen, M., Sundqvist, O., Syrjä, I., Järnstedt, J., et al. (2022) · International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery · doi:10.1007/s11548-022-02685-1 · Cited by 11
“The use of speech interfaces is growing in popularity [18].”
BackgroundHassan, S., Pataca, C. D. L., Nourian, L., Tigwell, G. W., Davis, B., & Wagman, W. Z. S. (2024) · International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3613904.3642710 · Cited by 10
“For this, we utilized the Wizard-of-Oz method, a well-established approach in HCI for exploring future technology [ 24, 41, 55, 88].”
MethodVoice Interaction for Augmented Reality Navigation Interfaces with Natural Language Understanding
Zhao, J., Parry, C. J., dos Anjos, R. D., Anslow, C., & Rhee, T. (2020) · Image and Vision Computing New Zealand · doi:10.1109/ivcnz51579.2020.9290643 · Cited by 10
“Clark, Leigh et al. [21] surveyed 68 research papers to identify the trends, themes, findings and methods of empirical research on speech interfaces in HCI.”
Mapping Theoretical and Methodological Perspectives for Understanding Speech Interface Interactions
Clark, L., Cowan, B. R., Edwards, J., Munteanu, C., Murad, C., Aylett, M., Moore, R. K., Edlund, J., Székely, É., Healey, P., et al. (2019) · CHI Extended Abstracts · doi:10.1145/3290607.3299009 · Cited by 10
“Across speech research in HCI, some theoretical concepts and methods have started to be borrowed from other disciplines to explain user behaviour and inform speech interface design [5].”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citationSuper Kawaii Vocalics: Amplifying the "Cute" Factor in Computer Voice
Mandai, Y., Seaborn, K., Nakano, T., Sun, X., Wang, Y.-J., & Kato, J. (2025) · International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3706598.3713709 · Cited by 9
“This field aims to understand and improve the fit between people and computers in situations where the interaction is based on speech [8, 53].”
Clark, J. R., Large, D. R., Shaw, E., Nichele, E., Trigo, M. J. G., Fischer, J. E., Burnett, G., & Stanton, N. A. (2023) · Applied Ergonomics · doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2023.104152 · Cited by 16
“…that feature Conversational User Interfaces; CUIs) are gaining favour in addressing these issues by keeping the driver appraised of the driving situation, as this form of user-interaction is flexible, immediate, and rich in information (Clark et al., 2019c; Large et al., 2017; Velaga et al., 2021).”
BackgroundSin, J., Munteanu, C., Chen, D., & Threatt, J. G. (2022) · Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/07370024.2022.2098129 · Cited by 8
“This paper’s core contribution is an understanding of how well mass media messaging is supported by academic design literature – that is, human-computer interaction (HCI) literature, which herein we refer to interchangeably with the terms ‘academic research,’ ‘academic findings,’ ‘academic evidence,’ ‘academic literat…”
BackgroundSelf-citationWhat's Up With These Conversational Health Agents? From Users' Critiques to Implications for Design
Maharjan, R., Doherty, K., Rohani, D. A., Bækgaard, P., & Bardram, J. E. (2022) · Frontiers in Digital Health · doi:10.3389/fdgth.2022.840232 · Cited by 7
“A recent review of the HCI literature concerning speech interfaces suggests a lack of empirical work in voice-based conversational interaction due to the barriers to evaluation in real-world contexts, thereby impairing our understanding of CA user experience (31).”
BackgroundDesigning Accessible Audio Nudges for Voice Interfaces
Jamshed, H., Nurain, N., & Brewer, R. N. (2025) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3706598.3713563 · Cited by 5
“Prior research on accessibility and audio-based interfaces emphasizes how disruption is detrimental to non-visual information access [24, 39, 59, 75, 99, 115].”
Markus, A., Pfister, J., Carolus, A., Andreas Hotho, A., & Wienrich, C. (2024) · Computers and Education Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100229 · Cited by 11
Mueller, S., Kelleher, T., & Ibuki, Y. (2024) · Journal of Interactive Advertising · doi:10.1080/15252019.2024.2303008 · Cited by 8
“Systematic literature reviews have been conducted on a wide variety of topics pertaining to chatbots, ranging from their design features (Ter Stal et al. 2020) to their speech (Clark et al. 2019).”
BackgroundGist and Verbatim: Understanding Speech to Inform New Interfaces for Verbal Text Composition
Mehra, B., Shen, K., Yen, R., & Liu, C. (2023) · International Conference on Conversational User Interfaces · doi:10.1145/3571884.3597134 · Cited by 8
“centered studies to design more intuitive speech-based interfaces and (b) summarizing theoretical understandings of speech as a way to inform interface design [12].”
BackgroundAddressing Hiccups in Conversations with Recommender Systems
Viswanathan, S., Guillot, F., Chang, M., Grasso, A. M., & Renders, J.-M. (2022) · Designing Interactive Systems Conference · doi:10.1145/3532106.3533491 · Cited by 8
“Surveying the state of speech in HCI, Clark et al. identifes the need to devise theories of speech interface interaction [12].”
BackgroundDo current user testing practices meet the needs of the new interactive paradigms?
Capdevila, M. G., Saltiveri, T. G. I., Garrido, J. E., Müller, O. H., & Ruas, L. C. (2021) · Interacción · doi:10.1145/3471391.3471416 · Cited by 8
“Methodological and evaluation challenges have been noticed by several authors in VUI [13, 30, 42, 46, 52, 53], ARUI/VRUI [4, 6, 20,”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialA First Look at Privacy Risks of Android Task-executable Voice Assistant Applications
Pan, S.-D., Ge, Y., & Sun, X.-Y. (2025) · Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference · doi:10.1109/apsec66846.2025.00042 · Cited by 7
“For instance, Apple’s Siri 1 , Amazon’s Alexa 2 , and Google Assistant 3 have revolutionized how users interact with their devices, allowing for hands-free operation of smart-phones, smart home devices, and even vehicles [1], [2].”
User Preferences for Interactive 3D Object Transitions in Cross Reality - An Elicitation Study
Wang, N., Zielasko, D., & Maurer, F. (2024) · International Working Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces · doi:10.1145/3656650.3656698 · Cited by 7
“…eye gaze interaction, voice interaction, non-verbal vocal input, and brain-computer interfaces, Jankowski et al. state that novel input modalities will not replace the mouse, keyboards, and touchscreens as the major input modality for interacting with standard monitor devices [9, 17, 37, 46].”
BackgroundNuñez, T. R., Jakobowsky, C., Prynda, K., Bergmann, K., & Pütten, A. M. R.-V. D. (2023) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2023.103093 · Cited by 12
Jeromela, J., & Conlan, O. (2023) · International Conference on Conversational User Interfaces · doi:10.1145/3571884.3604317 · Cited by 7
“…(IPAs) – also referred to as virtual, digital, or, when it is the dominant interaction modality, voice assistants 1 – became practically omnipresent in the day-to-day lives of users through integration in personal computers, smart-phones, smartwatches, smart TVs, and smart speakers [5, 9, 20].”
Background“Foggy sounds like nothing” — enriching the experience of voice assistants with sonic overlays
Esau-Held, M., Marsh, A., Krauß, V., & Stevens, G. (2023) · Personal and Ubiquitous Computing · doi:10.1007/s00779-023-01722-3 · Cited by 7
“Consequently, VAs need reliable usability to prevent users from negative experience [4, 31, 32], and furthermore research to investigate the positive aspects of user experience, which might contribute to an enchanting, playful, meaningful, and engaging interaction [33].”
BackgroundInfluentialA Comparative Study of Typing and Speech For Map Metadata Creation
Lai, P.-C., & Degbelo, A. (2021) · AGILE Conf. · doi:10.5194/agile-giss-2-7-2021 · Cited by 7
“Accessibility (mentioned in a recent review by Clark et al. (2019)) and broadcasting are additional areas.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialDoyle, P. R., Rough, D., Edwards, J., Cowan, B. R., Clark, L., Porcheron, M., Schlögl, S., Torres, M. I., Munteanu, C., Murad, C., et al. (2021) · IUI Companion · doi:10.1145/3397482.3450706 · Cited by 7
“The technological advancements and rapid growth of commercially available chatbots [6] and speech interfaces [5] - accessible through websites, mobile devices, in-car communication systems and smart speakers amongst others - makes the need for developing established theoretical and methodological frameworks in CUI int…”
BackgroundSelf-citationSpeech-based interaction for map editing on mobile devices: a scenario-based study
Degbelo, A., & Somaskantharajan, S. (2020) · Message Understanding Conference · doi:10.1145/3404983.3409996 · Cited by 7
“Speech-based interaction is a burgeoning area for research as a recent review by Clark et al. [9] reminded.”
MethodKim, B., Choi, C.-H., Kim, D., Lee, D., Ewer, E., Kim, E.-C., Kim, G., Kim, H., Kim, H.-G., Park, I., et al. (2026) · arXiv.org · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2605.23912 · Cited by 6
“The centrality of speech is increasingly reflected in modern computing, from in-vehicle voice assistants and game-playing agents to voice-based robot control and computer use (Arora et al., 2025; Clark et al., 2019).”
Zhang, Y., Ma, Y., Fu, D., Portales, S. Z., Fjeld, M., & Kragic, D. (2025) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2511.06954 · Cited by 6
“As a representative, voice assistants, a common type of CA, are now ubiquitous and available across a range of devices such as smartphones, computers, and smart speakers [18], utilized in diverse contexts, including smart home and automotive settings [1, 9, 54].”
Seaborn, K., Altmeyer, M., Li, G., Ku, B., Kobuki, S., & Urakami, J. (2025) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2025.103576 · Cited by 7
Hearing Ambiguity: Exploring Beyond-Gender Impressions of Artificial Ambiguous Voices
Cet, M. D., Seaborn, K., Obaid, M., & Torre, I. (2025) · International Conference on Conversational User Interfaces · doi:10.1145/3719160.3736622 · Cited by 6
“Users also interpret the voice phenomena they hear in ways beyond mere content, notably reading in cues to humanlikeness and artificiality [14, 44, 54].”
Chen, J., Grubert, J., & Kristensson, P. O. (2024) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2410.21091 · Cited by 2
“For the speech interaction modality specifically, Clark et al. [12] conducted a thematic analysis to summarize nine primary research topics for HCI works with a focus in speech interfaces and identify gaps and challenges in speech interface research.”
BackgroundKang, W., Hughes, M. A., & Roy, D. K. (2024) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3687021 · Cited by 6
Kao, D., Mubarrat, S. T., Joshi, A., Pandita, S., Mousas, C., Liang, H., & Ratan, R. (2023) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2023.103146 · Cited by 7
“I'm” Lost in Translation: Pronoun Missteps in Crowdsourced Data Sets
Seaborn, K., & Kim, Y. (2023) · CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA) · doi:10.1145/3544549.3585667 · Cited by 5
“As such, alongside the move towards voice- and speech-based interaction [15, 34], gender bias in NLP is”
BackgroundPeña, P., Doyle, P. R., Ip, E. Y. J., Liberto, G. M. D., Higgins, D., Mcdonnell, R., Branigan, H., Gustafson, J., Mcmillan, D., Moore, R. J., et al. (2023) · CHI Extended Abstracts · doi:10.1145/3544549.3583179 · Cited by 6
“However, understanding of what governs user language choices in such humanmachine dialogues (HMD) is sparse [14].”
BackgroundSelf-citationScrutability of Intelligent Personal Assistants
Jeromela, J. (2022) · ACM Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation and Personalization (UMAP) · doi:10.1145/3503252.3534355 · Cited by 6
“Virtual assistants, or intelligent personal assistants (IPAs), as they are frequently titled in literature [5], became omnipresent in recent years thanks to the now-common practice of integrating such services in personal computers, smartphones, smartwatches, smart TVs, and smart speakers [6, 18, 31].”
BackgroundWhat’s in a name and does CUI matter?
Porcheron, M. (2021) · International Conference on Conversational User Interfaces · doi:10.1145/3469595.3469619 · Cited by 6
Müller, R., Paul, D., & Li, Y. (2021) · Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. · doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2020.102516 · Cited by 6
Making-a-Scene: A Preliminary Case Study on Speech-Based 3D Shape Exploration Through Scene Modeling
Vyas, S., Chen, T.-J., Mohanty, R. R., & Krishnamurthy, V. (2022) · Journal of Computing and Information Science in Engineering · doi:10.1115/1.4055239 · Cited by 5
“However, further exploration is needed to properly recognize users’ intent in free-form conversation and implement suitable processing techniques such as context-aware topic modeling to enable an intuitive and effective communication environment [28].”
BackgroundSchartmüller, C., & Riener, A. (2022) · International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces · doi:10.1145/3490099.3511131 · Cited by 5
“For a full review of the “State of Speech in HCI”, we refer to Clark et al. [8].”
BackgroundVoice Interaction for Training: Opportunities, Challenges, and Recommendations from HCI Perspective
Kondratova, I., & Emond, B. (2020) · Interacción · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-50506-6_6 · Cited by 5
A Virtual Reality Training Tool to Improve Weight-Related Communication Across Healthcare Settings
Quigley, F., Moorhead, A., Bond, R., Zheng, H., & McAloon, T. (2019) · European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics · doi:10.1145/3335082.3335121 · Cited by 5
“Woz has been used to prototype applications of new technologies, such as VR apps and digital assistant apps (Jonell et al. 2017; Clark et al. 2019).”
MethodChen, J.-L., Grubert, J., & Kristensson, P. O. (2025) · ACM Symposium on Spatial User Interaction (SUI) · doi:10.1145/3694907.3765913 · Cited by 2
Zhang, S.-N., Chen, H., Wang, Y.-B., Xu, Y., Bai, J., Wu, Y., Li, S., Yi, X., Wang, C., & Li, H.-W. (2025) · Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive Mobile Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies · doi:10.1145/3749510 · Cited by 4
“Voice interaction, a subject extensively studied across various domains including telephony, mobile applications, and in-vehicle systems [28, 68, 127] is fundamentally shaped by its inherent characteristics beyond mere linguistic content.”
Li, L., Wang, G., & Freeman, G. (2025) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3706598.3713124 · Cited by 4
“This reinforces the fear of social stigma, where non-native English-speaking academics feel pressure to conform to the linguistic expectations of HCI academic settings [31, 32], even when they might beneft from technological support.”
Validation of the UEQ+ Scales for Voice Quality
Klein, A. M., Kollmorgen, J., Hinderks, A., Schrepp, M., Rauschenberger, M., & Cuaresma, M. (2025) · Comput. Stand. Interfaces · doi:10.1016/j.csi.2024.103971 · Cited by 4
MoSS: Unfolding Playful Imaginaries of Synthetic Voice Design through a Modular Smart Speaker
Knudsen, S., Fritsch, J., & Jørgensen, S. M. H. (2024) · Conference on Designing Interactive Systems · doi:10.1145/3656156.3665428 · Cited by 4
“Currently, machine learning tools have rapidly changed the voice synthesis landscape, making it possible for more people to play with, create and modify synthetic voices in new ways, exploring the breath of vocal expressions [4].”
BackgroundArlinghaus, C. S., & Ollermann, F. (2022) · Message Understanding Conference · doi:10.1145/3543758.3547544 · Cited by 4
“in research on how the use of voice controls affects the emotional evaluation of mobile phones as well as general underrepresentation of voice-controlled systems in hci research [2, 7].”
BackgroundAn intelligent voice recognition system based on fuzzy logic and the bag-of-words technique
Stefanenko, O., Lipinskiy, L., Polyakova, A., Khudonogova, J. A., & Semenkin, E. S. (2022) · IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering · doi:10.1088/1757-899x/1230/1/012020 · Cited by 4
Poster: APIs for IPAs? Towards End-User Tailoring of Intelligent Personal Assistants
Rough, D., & Cowan, B. R. (2020) · IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages / Human-Centric Computing Languages and Environments · doi:10.1109/vl/hcc50065.2020.9127267 · Cited by 4
“The rapid growth of speech as an interaction modality has been driven by the uptake of smart speakers and smartphone-based assistants by consumers, thereby stimulating an increase in HCI research aiming to understand users’ preferences, challenges, and strategies related to their IPA use [1].”
BackgroundConversational Smart Products: A Research Opportunity, First Investigation And Definition
Vitali, I., & Arquilla, V. (2019) · DeSForM19 Proceedings · doi:10.21428/5395bc37.d8801b95 · Cited by 4
“[2] did a systematic review on the status of speech interfaces in HCI.”
BackgroundGaze and Speech in Multimodal Human-Computer Interaction: A Scoping Review
Khan, A. A., Weidner, F., Rhee, J., Abdrabou, Y., Bianchi, A., Velloso, E., Gellersen, H., & Newn, J. (2026) · International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3772318.3791662 · Cited by 3
SIA: A Framework for Context-Aware Intent Clarification in Speech-Driven Immersive Analytics
Song, H., Whitley, K., Krokos, E., & Varshney, A. (2026) · International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces · doi:10.1145/3742413.3789063 · Cited by 3
“In XR, early studies such as Put That There [5] have examined how speech and other interaction modalities (e.g., gesture) together clarify user intent.”
Sogemeier, D., Naujoks, F., Forster, Y., Krems, J. F., & Keinath, A. (2025) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2025.2578394 · Cited by 3
“Although trust in technology – including automotive systems – has been extensively studied, trust in in-vehicle VAs remains a relatively underexplored domain (Clark et al., 2019).”
Headzoom: Hands-Free Zooming and Panning for 2D Image Navigation Using Head Motion
Zhang, K., Moreira, C., Belchior, P., Lee, G., Billinghurst, M., & Jorge, J. A. (2025) · Proceedings - International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality, ISMAR · doi:10.1109/ismar67309.2025.00134 · Cited by 1
“Speech interfaces allow users to issue commands verbally or dictate text input [12, 31].”
Towards a Framework for Exploring Synthetic Voices in VUI Design
Fritsch, J., Karaturhan, P., Jørgensen, S. M. H., Ada, A. A., & Knudsen, S. (2025) · Conference on Designing Interactive Systems · doi:10.1145/3715336.3735729 · Cited by 3
Baumann, M., Markus, A., Pfister, J., Carolus, A., Andreas Hotho, A., & Wienrich, C. (2025) · Computers in Human Behavior Reports · doi:10.1016/j.chbr.2025.100610 · Cited by 3
Developing a Generic Focus Modality for Multimodal Interactive Environments
Barros, F., Teixeira, A. J. S., & Silva, S. S. (2023) · ICMI Companion · doi:10.1145/3610661.3617165 · Cited by 3
“Additionally, by considering speech for interaction, we can potentially make Human-Computer Interaction more interesting, realistic, and easier from the user’s perspective [9, 12] in several contexts.”
BackgroundFuentes, C., Porcheron, M., & Fischer, J. E. (2023) · ACM Conference on Conversational User Interfaces (CUI) · doi:10.1145/3571884.3597137 · Cited by 2
“Similar to SDSs, spoken language understanding (SLU), involves automatic speech recognition, natural language processing, understanding, and synthesis [6, 25].”
BackgroundDis/Immersion in Mindfulness Meditation with a Wandering Voice Assistant
Ku, B., Itagaki, T., & Seaborn, K. (2023) · CHI Extended Abstracts · doi:10.1145/3544549.3585627 · Cited by 3
“Voice-based virtual assistants (VAs), in particular, can provide hands-free guidance, which is suitable for mindfulness meditation [8, 27].”
BackgroundEmbrace your incompetence! Designing appropriate CUI communication through an ecological approach
Becker, S., Doyle, P. R., & Edwards, J. (2022) · ACM Conference on Conversational User Interfaces (CUI) · doi:10.1145/3543829.3544531 · Cited by 1
“facilitate comfort and rapport building in situations where forming a bond and building trust are important, such as in healthcare, education, or social programs [18], and can act as a strong initial enticement for people to adopt speech interfaces in the first place [37].”
BackgroundSelf-citationShen, P., Peng, D., & Xu, J. (2026) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2026.116338 · Cited by 4
Neuhaus, R., Laschke, M., Ringfort-Felner, R., & Hassenzahl, M. (2025) · International Academic Mindtrek Conference (Mindtrek) · doi:10.1145/3757980.3758001 · Cited by 2
“Even though many interactions with conversational technology were shown to be discouraging and disappointing [45], and the development of theories and work on speech interaction design proves to be challenging [14], relevancy does not decline.”
Towards Age-Inclusive Conversational interfaces: Understanding Requirements Across Age Groups
Boostani, R., Munteanu, C., & Kuzminykh, A. (2025) · ACM Conference on Conversational User Interfaces (CUI) · doi:10.1145/3719160.3736619 · Cited by 3
Self-citationOh, J., Choi, Y. J., & Lee, S.-S. (2025) · Conference on Designing Interactive Systems · doi:10.1145/3715336.3735763 · Cited by 2
“Earlier researchers [13, 19] also emphasized the importance of re-evaluating earlier research in light of modern speech synthesis technology as it continues to improve.”
Speech Neurophysiology in Realistic Contexts: Big Hype or Big Leap?
Liberto, G. M. D., & Ip, E. Y. J. (2026) · European Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1111/ejn.70496 · Cited by 6
“We introduce the term of an ‘unremarked listener’ (Figure 3) role to refer to the previously used term ‘eavesdropper’ (Bell 1984).”
ChatGPT and U(X): A Rapid Review on Measuring the User ExperiencePreprint
Seaborn, K. (2025) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2503.15808 · Cited by 4
“Text and voice modalities offer different UX and may be used together (Clark et al., 2019; Seaborn et al., 2021).”
InfluentialAfzal, M., Salahuddin, M., Hira, S., Sultan, M. F., Ahmad, S. Z., & Iqbal, M. W. (2024) · Bulletin of business and economics · doi:10.61506/01.00386 · Cited by 2
“The paper advocates for increased design efforts and extensive research on multi-user interaction settings (Klumpp et al., 2019; Clark et al., 2019).”
BackgroundDutta, N., & Dhar, D. (2024) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447318.2023.2298534 · Cited by 4
“With the advancement of speech technologies, the scope and expectations of speech-based interactions evolve into conversational interactions, over the last two decades (Clark et al., 2019; Cowan, 2017; Glass, 1999; Leigh Clark, 2019; Yankelovich, 1995).”
Sargsyan, L., Choi, S., & Kim, S.-H. (2023) · Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting · doi:10.1177/21695067231192609 · Cited by 2
“No official conversation design principles or thorough VA studies have been done to inform conversation designers on language forms and discursive structure of speech output (Clark et al., 2019).”
BackgroundSpeaking, fast or slow: how conversational agents’ rate of speech influences user experience
Xie, Y., Qu, J., Zhang, Y., Zhou, R., & Chan, A. H. S. (2023) · Universal Access in the Information Society · doi:10.1007/s10209-023-01000-2 · Cited by 4
“With regard to perceived understandability, users consider news with a slow speed to be more understandable and have a better user experience [8, 9].”
A Dynamic Adjustment System of Vehicle Rearview Mirror using Gaze Detection
Han, Z.-J., Niu, Y.-F., & Yang, W. (2022) · International Conference on Human System Interaction · doi:10.1109/hsi55341.2022.9869501 · Cited by 2
“Furthermore, the current voice interaction technology is not seamless but more like a task-based dialogue paradigm [3].”
BackgroundSocial aspects of human-computer interactions in the media: tendencies and threats
Susskaya, O., & Budanova, A. (2019) · CSIS'2019 · doi:10.1145/3373722.3373788 · Cited by 2
“matter, to human organization or human activity as a whole [9, 10].”
BackgroundSILENCE: Protecting privacy in offloaded speech understanding on resource-constrained devices
Cai, D., Wang, S.-G., Zhang, Z., Lin, F. X., & Xu, M.-W. (2024) · Neural Information Processing Systems · doi:10.52202/079017-3360 · Cited by 2
“…uploaded to the cloud for spoken language understanding (SLU) is steadily increasing [1, 13, 2], particularly in ubiquitous wimpy devices where textual input is inconvenient [50, 19, 3], e.g., home automation devices [40], smartwatches [46], telehealth sensors [26] and smart factory sensors [35] .”
SoleSense: A Shoe-Based Wearable for Sound Event Localization and Detection in Urban Environments
Xia, J.-X., Sui, Y.-Y., Yang, W., Xu, H.-J., Zhang, Y.-T., & Xia, S. (2026) · Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive Mobile Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies · doi:10.1145/3832018 · Cited by 1
“Knowing the words being spoken (e.g., keyword spotting [53]) and the direction of the voice can be important for applications in improving situation awareness [79], AR/VR/MR [84], human-computer interaction [17, 55], and more.”
Voice based Guide for Semi-Literate Loan Applicant
T, D., P, D., R, D., Gobika, S., & Bharaninayagi, S. (2025) · 2025 International Conference on Sustainable Communication Networks and Application (ICSCN) · doi:10.1109/icscn67106.2025.11308420 · Cited by 1
Peña, P., & Cowan, B. R. (2025) · International Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents · doi:10.1145/3717511.3747071 · Cited by 1
Transhuman Ansambl - Voice Beyond Language
Ivsic, L., McCormack, J., & Dziekan, V. (2024) · arXiv.org · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2405.03134 · Cited by 1
“NIME’24, 4–6 September, Utrecht, The Netherlands. in human-computer interaction [9, 5, 19] and at NIME [12].”
Metadata
- Authors
- Clark, L., Doyle, P., Garaialde, D., Gilmartin, E., Schlögl, S., Edlund, J., Aylett, M., Cabral, J., Munteanu, C., Edwards, J., & R Cowan, B.
- Affiliations
- University College Dublin (IE)
- Trinity College Dublin (IE)
- Universität Innsbruck (AT)
- KTH Royal Institute of Technology (SE)
- CereProc (United Kingdom) (GB)
- University of Toronto (CA)
- School of Information and Communication Studies, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland
- Corresponding author
- Clark, Leigh
- ORCID
- Venue
- Interacting with Computers
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2019-06-01
- Volume
- 31
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 349-371
- ISSN
- 0953-5438 (ISSN-L)
- 1873-7951
- OpenAlex
- W2896893982
- Cited by
- 193
- References
- 175
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 34 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 27 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 9
- FWCI
- 10.61
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Licence
- academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model (vor)
- Locations
- Interacting with Computers (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- Irish Research Council
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Speech and dialogue systems
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
- Keywords
- speech interfaces, usability evaluation, Wizard of Oz, interactive voice response, assistive technology, accessibility, virtual assistants, user memory, speech production, modality comparison, research gaps, measurement reliability
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