The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
When Users Assist the Voice Assistants: From Supervision to Failure Resolution
Abstract
We conducted an in situ study of six households in domestic and driving situations in order to better understand how voice assistants (VA) are used and evaluate the efficiency of vocal interactions in natural contexts. The filmed observations and interviews revealed activities of supervision, verification, diagnosis and problem-solving. These activities were not only costly in time, but they also interrupted the flow in the inhabitants' other activities. Although the VAs were expected to facilitate the accomplishment of a second, simultaneous task, they in fact were a hindrance. Such failures can cause abandonment, but the results nevertheless revealed a paradox of use: the inhabitants forgave and accepted these errors, while continuing to appropriate the vocal system.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
In the citing paper
“Prior work has explored the diversity of issues affecting engagement and ongoing use of voice assistants and has shown that when users have expectations for voice assistants that surpass its capabilities, voice assistant failures and user frustration ensues [31, 35].”
From A Mixed-Methods Approach to Understanding User Trust after Voice Assistant Failures (2023) · cites this paper as [31]
In the citing paper
“Sometimes after a failure, users will try to reformulate, simplify, or hyper-enunciate their commands as a way to continue using the device [31, 35, 43, 61].”
From A Mixed-Methods Approach to Understanding User Trust after Voice Assistant Failures (2023) · cites this paper as [31]
In the citing paper
“If users are repeatedly unable to repair failures with voice assistant, this weakens their trust and causes them to reduce their scope of commands to simple tasks with low risk of failure [31, 35].”
From A Mixed-Methods Approach to Understanding User Trust after Voice Assistant Failures (2023) · cites this paper as [31]
In the citing paper
“Lahoual and Frejus [31] found that in some situations, voice assistant failures can erode trust to the extent that users abandon voice assistants all together.”
From A Mixed-Methods Approach to Understanding User Trust after Voice Assistant Failures (2023) · cites this paper as [31]
Citations
Cites
Luger, 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
Intelligibility and Accountability: Human Considerations in Context-Aware Systems
Bellotti, V., & Edwards, K. (2001) · Human–Computer Interaction · doi:10.1207/s15327051hci16234_05 · Cited by 471
Patterns for How Users Overcome Obstacles in Voice User Interfaces
Myers, C., Furqan, A., Nebolsky, J., Caro, K., & Zhu, J. (2018) · Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3173574.3173580 · Cited by 213 · cited 1×
“To overcome the frequently encountered voice recognition errors, users engage in processes of "repairing and constructing meaning in the interaction" [8], which results in a continuous investment in adapting to the system through, for example, reformulation, simplification or hyperenunciation [7,6,8].”
BackgroundPersonification of the Amazon Alexa: BFF or a Mindless Companion
Lopatovska, I., & Williams, H. (2018) · Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Human Information Interaction&Retrieval - CHIIR '18 · doi:10.1145/3176349.3176868 · Cited by 160
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- S. Brennan . 1990. Conversation as direct manipulation: An iconoclastic view . In The Art of Human-Computer Interface Design . B.K. Laurel (Ed.), Reading, MA : Addison-Wesley . S. Brennan. 1990. Conversation as direct manipulation: An iconoclastic view. In The Art of Human-Computer Interface Design. B.K. Laurel (Ed.), Reading, MA : Addison-Wesley.
- R. De Rennesse . Virtual digital assistants to overtake world population by 2021 . https://ovum.informa.com/resources/product-content/virtual-digital-assistants-to-overtake-world-population-by-2021 R. De Rennesse. Virtual digital assistants to overtake world population by 2021. https://ovum.informa.com/resources/product-content/virtual-digital-assistants-to-overtake-world-population-by-2021
- W. K. Edwards and R. E. Grinter . 2001. At Home with Ubiquitous Computing: Seven Challenges . In Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on Ubiquitous Computing (UbiComp '01) , Gregory D. Abowd, Barry Brumitt, and Steven A. Shafer (Eds.). Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 256--272. W. K. Edwards and R. E. Grinter. 2001. At Home with Ubiquitous Computing: Seven Challenges. In Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on Ubiquitous Computing (UbiComp '01), Gregory D. Abowd, Barry Brumitt, and Steven A. Shafer (Eds.). Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 256--272.
- J. Velkovska and M. Zouinar . 2018. The illusion of natural conversation: interacting with smart assistants in home settings . In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '18) . J. Velkovska and M. Zouinar. 2018. The illusion of natural conversation: interacting with smart assistants in home settings. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '18).
- 10.1177/1541931215591342 · DOI
Cited by
Wei, J., Tag, B., Trippas, J. R., Dingler, T., & Kostakos, V. (2022) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3491102.3517432 · Cited by 46
Schlomann, A., Wahl, H.-W., Zentel, P., Heyl, V., Knapp, L., Opfermann, C., Krämer, T., & Rietz, C. (2021) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.684012 · Cited by 36
A Mixed-Methods Approach to Understanding User Trust after Voice Assistant Failures
Baughan, A., Wang, X., Liu, A., Mercurio, A., Chen, J., & Ma, X. (2023) · Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3544548.3581152 · Cited by 32
“Sometimes after a failure, users will try to reformulate, simplify, or hyper-enunciate their commands as a way to continue using the device [31, 35, 43, 61].”
BackgroundInfluentialAvgustis, I., Shirokov, A., & Iivari, N. (2021) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-85610-6_10 · Cited by 11
“Try, Try, Try Again:” Sequence Analysis of User Interaction Data with a Voice User Interface
Myers, C. M., Laris Pardo, L. F., Acosta-Ruiz, A., Canossa, A., & Zhu, J. (2021) · CUI 2021 - 3rd Conference on Conversational User Interfaces · doi:10.1145/3469595.3469613 · Cited by 10
Metadata
- Authors
- Lahoual, D., & Frejus, M.
- Affiliations
- Électricité de France (France) (FR)
- EDF R&D, Palaiseau, France
- ORCID
- Lahoual, Dounia
- Venue
- Extended Abstracts of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2019-05-02
- Pages
- 1-8
- OpenAlex
- W2943811965
- Cited by
- 28
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 5
- FWCI
- 1.63
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA) (publishedVersion)
- HAL (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Speech and dialogue systems
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › AI in Service Interactions
- Keywords
- voice assistants, vocal interaction, user support, household use, driving situations, problem solving, task interruption, user abandonment, in situ study
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: When Users Assist the Voice Assistants: From Supervision to Failure Resolution. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/3290607.3299053
- The paper
- Lahoual, D., & Frejus, M. (2019). When Users Assist the Voice Assistants: From Supervision to Failure Resolution. Extended Abstracts of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290607.3299053
