CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 5Usability and User Interface DesignTranslation Studies and PracticesDigital Accessibility for Disabilities

Lost in Translation: A Cross-Cultural Examination of Linguistic Inaccessibility in HCI

Open access
Vigh, Eszter, Weir, Ellen, Tcherdakoff, Nathalie Alexandra Penglin, Stangroome, Grace Jane, Gu, Yelu, Metatla, Oussama, Watanabe, Mamoru, Schäfer, René +8 more·2025·Proceedings of the Extended Abstracts of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
DOI 10.1145/3706599.3716229
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

This paper examines linguistic and cultural diversity in Human-Computer Interaction through multilingual experiences across various native languages, including Hungarian, Japanese, Cree, German, Welsh, Spanish, Mandarin, French, Polish, and Arabic. Each contribution reveals unique challenges in translation, usability, and cultural nuance within digital interfaces, with linguistic barriers ranging from issues with non-Latin characters to loss of contextual meaning and limited localisation options. These sections highlight the limitations of current design practices, which often prioritise English-centric frameworks that fail to accommodate diverse language structures and cultural nuances. By capturing these varied perspectives, this paper underscores the need for inclusive, cross-lingual design practices that address global usability challenges. It contributes to the development of more accessible and culturally sensitive digital environments, fostering an HCI approach that values linguistic diversity and cultural specificity.

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 · 10.1145/3706599.3716229

Cites

1 of 1 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?

  • Domain-specific English terminology was considered more accurate and familiar to the target group, reducing the risk of misinterpretation.

    “Similar to observations by Vigh et al. (2025)[55], domain-specific English terminology was considered more accurate and familiar to the target group, reducing the risk of misinterpretation.”

    From Proceedings of the 37th Australian Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (2025) · cites this paper as Vigh et al. (2025)[55]

    In the Introduction (page unavailable), Vigh et al. describe translations that lose context or leave room for interpretation, supporting the concern about misinterpretation. Our copy does not say that domain-specific English terminology was more accurate or familiar to a target group, or that using it reduced that risk. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    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

Research works printed but not linked: 44

  1. Salim Abu-Rabia. 2002. Reading in a root-based-morphology language: the case of Arabic. Journal of Research in Reading 25, 3 (2002), 299-309.
  2. Yoko Akama. 2014. Attuning to Ma (Between-ness) in Designing. In Proceed- ings of the 13th Participatory Design Conference: Short Papers, Industry Cases, Workshop Descriptions, Doctoral Consortium Papers, and Keynote Abstracts, Vol. 2. 21-24. https://doi.org/10.1145/2662155.2662179 · DOI
  3. Melissa Anderson-Chavarria. 2022. The autism predicament: models of autism and their impact on autistic identity. Disability & Society 37, 8 (Sept. 2022), 1321-1341. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2021.1877117 · DOI
  4. Paula Bourges-Waldegg and Stephen AR Scrivener. 1998. Meaning, the central issue in cross-cultural HCI design. Interacting with computers 9, 3 (1998), 287- 309.
  5. R. Allen Brown. 2006. The Battle of Hastings. In Medieval Warfare 1000-1300. Routledge.
  6. The Cambridge Language Collective. 2024. Protecting or Persecuting the French Language? The Unpleasant Underbelly of France's Linguistic Watchdog, L'Académie Française. https://www.thecambridgelanguagecollective.com/ europe/protecting-or-persecuting-the-french-language-the-unpleasant- underbelly-of-frances-linguistic-watchdog-lacadmie-franaise. Accessed: 2024-12-03.
  7. Nils Dahlbäck, Seema Swamy, Clifford Nass, Fredrik Arvidsson, and Jörgen Skågeby. 2001. Spoken interaction with computers in a native or non-native language-same or different. In Proceedings of INTERACT. Citeseer, 294-301.
  8. Nick S. Dalton. 2013. Neurodiversity HCI. Interactions 20, 2 (March 2013), 72-75. https://doi.org/10.1145/2427076.2427091 · DOI
  9. Lennard J. Davis. 2016. The Disability Studies Reader. Routledge. Google-Books- ID: Hgx6DQAAQBAJ.
  10. Emily Dosch. 2023. Reimagining cultural representation of Latinidad on the US screen: this bridge called Disney. Master's thesis. Colorado State University.
  11. Dominique Estival and Alastair Pennycook. 2011. L'Académie française and Anglophone language ideologies. Language Policy 10, 4 (Nov. 2011), 325-341. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10993-011-9215-6 · DOI
  12. Anna Maria Feit, Mathieu Nancel, Maximilian John, Andreas Karrenbauer, Daryl Weir, and Antti Oulasvirta. 2021. AZERTY amélioré: computational design on a national scale. Commun. ACM 64, 2 (Jan. 2021), 48-58. https://doi.org/10.1145/ 3382035 · DOI
  13. Feng Feng, Daniel Bennett, and E. D. Mekler. 2024. Smiles Summon the Warmth of Spring: A Design Framework for Thermal-Affective Interaction Based in Chinese Cí Poetry. In Proceedings of the Designing Interactive Systems Conference. 2802-2819. https://doi.org/10.1145/3643834.3661620 · DOI
  14. Françoise Gadet. 2002. « Français populaire » : un concept douteux pour un objet évanescent. Diversité 130, 1 (2002), 40-50. https://doi.org/10.3406/diver. 2002.1337 · DOI
  15. Daniel Garcia. 2016. L'Académie française, une zone de non-droit en plein Paris:Enquête sur une institution richissime et hors-la-loi. Revue du Crieur 3, 1 (2016), 80-95. https://doi.org/10.3917/crieu.003.0080 · DOI
  16. Doris L. Garraway. 2005. The Libertine Colony: Creolization in the Early French Caribbean. Duke University Press. Google-Books-ID: O6BpIZewfnMC.
  17. Colin M. Gray, Yubo Kou, Bryan Battles, Joseph Hoggatt, and Austin L. Toombs. 2018. The Dark (Patterns) Side of UX Design. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Montreal QC, Canada) (CHI '18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3174108 · DOI
  18. Colin M. Gray, Cristiana Teixeira Santos, Nataliia Bielova, and Thomas Mildner. 2024. An Ontology of Dark Patterns Knowledge: Foundations, Definitions, and a Pathway for Shared Knowledge-Building. In Proceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Honolulu, HI, USA) (CHI '24). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 289, 22 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3613904.3642436 · DOI · Paper page
  19. Barbara E. Hanna and Juliana De Nooy. 2009. Debate or Conversation? French and British Public Internet Discussion. In Learning Language and Culture via Public Internet Discussion Forums. Palgrave Macmillan UK, London, 50-72. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230235823_3 · DOI
  20. Yi-Pin Huang, Hoisoo Kim, Yingying Pan, Xiao-Li Zheng, and Yun-Fang Tu. 2024. Promoting elementary school students' programming learning: Effects of metacognitive vs. cognitive scaffolding. Journal of Research on Technology in Education (2024), 1-16.
  21. Cristhy Jimenez, Pablo Lozada, and Pablo Rosas. 2016. Usability heuristics: A systematic review. In 2016 IEEE 11th Colombian Computing Conference (CCC). IEEE, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1109/ColumbianCC.2016.7750805 · DOI
  22. Nadine Kano and Asmus Freytag. 1994. The international character set conun- drum: ANSI, Unicode, and Microsoft Windows. Microsoft Systems Journal (1994), 55-70.
  23. Satoru Ikehara Kazuyuki Matoba and Jinichi Murakami. 2001. Analysis of the Meaning and Correspondence of Japanese-English Temporal Expressions. In Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Association for Natural Language Processing (2001). https://www.anlp.jp/proceedings/annual_meeting/2001/
  24. Setsuko Kiyomi. 2006. A Comparative Study of Emotional Expression between Japanese and English -Focusing on Basic Vocabulary of the Emotion <Pleasure>. Surugadai University Journal 32 (2006), 91-114.
  25. Sang Yun Kwon, Gagan Bhatia, El Moatez Billah Nagoudi, and Muhammad Abdul-Mageed. 2023. Beyond English: Evaluating LLMs for Arabic Grammatical Error Correction. arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.08400 (2023). · arXiv
  26. Roger Lathuillère. 1984. Jacques Allières, La formation de la langue française, Paris, P.U. F. (Que sais-je ? n° 1907), 1982. L'information grammaticale 22, 1 (1984), 44-45. https://www.persee.fr/doc/igram_0222-9838_1984_num_22_1_ 2247_t1_0044_0000_2
  27. Shaimaa Lazem, Danilo Giglitto, Makuochi Samuel Nkwo, Hafeni Mthoko, Jes- sica Upani, and Anicia Peters. 2021. Challenges and paradoxes in decolonising HCI: A critical discussion. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) (2021), 1-38.
  28. Aaron Marcus and Emilie West Gould. 2000. Crosscurrents: cultural dimensions and global Web user-interface design. interactions 7, 4 (2000), 32-46.
  29. Sarah McMonagle, Daniel Cunliffe, Lysbeth Jongbloed-Faber, and Paul Jarvis. 2019. What can hashtags tell us about minority languages on Twitter? A comparison of #cymraeg, #frysk, and #gaeilge. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 40, 1 (Jan. 2019), 32-49. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2018.1465429 Publisher: Routledge _eprint: https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2018.1465429. · DOI
  30. Rolf Molich and Jakob Nielsen. 1990. Improving a human-computer dialogue. Commun. ACM 33, 3 (March 1990), 338-348. https://doi.org/10.1145/77481.77486 · DOI
  31. Mohammad Mustafa, Afag Salah Eldeen, Sulieman Bani-Ahmad, Abdelrah- man Osman Elfaki, et al. 2017. A comparative survey on Arabic stemming: approaches and challenges. Intelligent Information Management 9, 02 (2017), 39.
  32. Takuji Narumi et al. 2010. Meta-Cookie. Transactions of the Virtual Reality Society of Japan 15 (2010), 579-588. https://doi.org/10.18974/tvrsj.15.4_579 · DOI
  33. Official Journal of the European Union. 2006. SPECIAL REPORT No 9/2006 concerning translation expenditure incurred by the Commission, the Parliament and the Council together with the institutions' replies (pursuant to Article 248(4), second paragraph, EC). Official Journal of the European Union C 284/1 (2006). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:C:2006:284: TOC 2006/C 284/01.
  34. Rhianon Packer. 2024. Cenedl heb iaith, cenedl heb galon: A Nation Without a Language Is a Nation Without a Heart: Dyslecsia a'r Gymraeg: Dyslexia and Welsh. In Dyslexia in Many Languages. Routledge. Num Pages: 13.
  35. Rebecca Posner and John N. Green (Eds.). 1993. Trends in Romance Linguistics and Philology. Volume 5: Bilingualism and Linguistic Conflict in Romance:. DE GRUYTER MOUTON. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110848649 · DOI
  36. Kevin Rebecchi. 2023. Neurodiversity and autism: between disability and dif- ference, science and ideology -Neurodiversité et autisme : entre handicap et différence, science et idéologie. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/bksxn · DOI
  37. Terry Regier and Yang Xu. 2017. The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis and inference under uncertainty. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science 8, 6 (2017), e1440.
  38. T. J. Roberts-Morgan et al. 2024. Sense-O-Nary: Exploring Children's Crossmodal Metaphors Through Playful Crossmodal Interactions. In Proceedings of the 23rd Annual ACM Interaction Design and Children Conference. 259-269. https: //doi.org/10.1145/3628516.3655785 · DOI
  39. Mercedes Banegas Saorín. 2022. Le plurilinguisme et l'humour dans le cinéma. Le cas de "Bienvenue chez les Ch'tis". Peter Lang ; Peter Lang Verlag, 115. https://uphf.hal.science/hal-04104478
  40. Eliane Viennot (Ed.). 2015. L'Academie contre la langue francaise: le dossier "feminisation". Editions iXe, Donnemarie-Dontilly.
  41. Georges Daniel Véronique. 2000. Créole, créoles français et théories de la créolisation. L'information grammaticale 85, 1 (2000), 33-38. https://doi.org/10. 3406/igram.2000.2769 · DOI
  42. George RS Weir, Giorgos Lepouras, and C Stephanidis. 2001. Localisation and linguistic anomalies. In Universal Access in HCI: Towards an Information Society for All: 9th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction.
  43. Yiran Zhao, Wenxuan Zhang, Guizhen Chen, Kenji Kawaguchi, and Lidong Bing. 2024. How do Large Language Models Handle Multilingualism? arXiv:2402.18815 [cs.CL] https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.18815 · arXiv
  44. Pierre Zémor. 2015. Développer en France une culture du débat public. Revue française d'administration publique 156, 4 (2015), 1101-1112. https://doi.org/10. 3917/rfap.156.1101 [100] · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Vigh, E., Weir, E., Tcherdakoff, N. A. P., Stangroome, G. J., Gu, Y., Metatla, O., Watanabe, M., Schäfer, R., Hahn, S., Krawczyk, K. M., Godoy, M., Cossovich, R., Morin, R., Dreaver-Charles, K., Koole, M., & Lewis, F. B. W.
Affiliations
  • University of Bristol (GB)
  • University of Bristol, Bristol, Gloucestershire, United Kingdom
  • RWTH Aachen University (DE)
  • Delft University of Technology (NL)
  • New York University Shanghai (CN)
  • Carleton University (CA)
  • University of Saskatchewan (CA)
  • University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada
ORCID
Venue
Proceedings of the Extended Abstracts of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
Publisher
ACM
Published
2025-04-25
Pages
1-16
DOI
10.1145/3706599.3716229
OpenAlex
W4409720257
Cited by
5
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 1
FWCI
5.07
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA) (publishedVersion)
  • Bristol Research (University of Bristol) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • RWTH Publications (RWTH Aachen) (submittedVersion)
  • Explore Bristol Research (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Translation Studies and Practices
  • Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Digital Accessibility for Disabilities
Keywords
linguistic diversity, cross-cultural usability, multilingual interface, localization, translation barriers, non-Latin scripts, inclusive design

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