Cited by 148Usability and User Interface DesignDigital Accessibility for DisabilitiesSpeech and dialogue systems

What can I say?: addressing user experience challenges of a mobile voice user interface for accessibility

Open access
Corbett, Eric, Weber, Astrid·2016·Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services

Abstract

Voice interactions on mobile phones are most often used to augment or supplement touch based interactions for users' convenience. However, for people with limited hand dexterity caused by various forms of motor-impairments voice interactions can have a significant impact and in some cases even enable independent interaction with a mobile device for the first time. For these users, a Mobile Voice User Interface (M-VUI), which allows for completely hands-free, voice only interaction would provide a high level of accessibility and independence. Implementing such a system requires research to address long standing usability challenges introduced by voice interactions that negatively affect user experience due to difficulty learning and discovering voice commands.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/2935334.2935386

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Studies investigating user experience and usability of voice assistants mainly involved able-bodied users.

    “Indeed, the studies investigating user experience and usability of voice assistants mainly involved able-bodied users [3,8-11], thereby neglecting a broad community of users with disabilities.”

    From Investigating the Accessibility of Voice Assistants With Impaired Users: Mixed Methods Study (2020) · cites this paper as [8]

    The Methods and Participants section (page unavailable) says the paper's usability sessions involved people with motor impairments, not mainly able-bodied users. The Preliminary User Evaluation section likewise describes recruiting participants with motor impairments. This paper therefore runs contrary to its use as an example of the studies described in the citing sentence; it does not establish the broader pattern across other studies. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Research on voice assistants is focused mainly on the general population.

    “Research on voice assistants is focused mainly on the general population.”

    From Investigating the Accessibility of Voice Assistants With Impaired Users: Mixed Methods Study (2020) · cites this paper as [8]

    The Introduction (page unavailable) discusses mainstream voice assistants and research on voice interfaces for accessibility, but does not say that voice-assistant research focuses mainly on the general population. A search for comparisons of research populations found no passage establishing that emphasis. (LLM, conf=0.75)

    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.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 34 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [17]17. Susumu Harada, Jacob O Wobbrock, and James A Landay. 2007. VoiceDraw: A Hands-Free Voice- Driven Drawing Application for People with Motor Impairments. 9th international ACM SIGACCESS conference on Computers and accessibility, ACM, 27-34.
  2. [21]21. Laurent Karsenty. 2002. Shifting the Design Philosophy of Spoken Natural Language Dialogue : International Journal of Speech Technology 5, 2: 147-157.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Corbett, E., & Weber, A.
Affiliations
Google (United States) (US)
Venue
Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services
Publisher
ACM
Published
2016-09-06
Pages
72-82
OpenAlex
W2514025902
Cited by
148
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 1
FWCI
7.71
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services (MobileHCI) (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
  • Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Digital Accessibility for Disabilities
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Speech and dialogue systems
Keywords
voice interaction, motor impairment, accessibility, touchless interaction, usability problems, user experience, mobile devices

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