No Cover Image

Conference Paper/Proceeding/Abstract 544 views 107 downloads

See What I’m Saying? Comparing Intelligent Personal Assistant Use for Native and Non-Native Language Speakers

Yunhan Wu, Daniel Rough, Anna Bleakley, Justin Edwards, Orla Cooney, Philip R. Doyle, Leigh Clark Orcid Logo, Benjamin R. Cowan

22nd International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services, Pages: 1 - 9

Swansea University Author: Leigh Clark Orcid Logo

DOI (Published version): 10.1145/3379503.3403563

Abstract

Limited linguistic coverage for Intelligent Personal Assistants (IPAs) means that many interact in a non-native language. Yet we know little about how IPAs currently support or hinder these users. Through native (L1) and non-native (L2) English speakers interacting with Google Assistant on a smartph...

Full description

Published in: 22nd International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services
ISBN: 9781450375160
Published: New York, NY, USA ACM 2020
URI: https://cronfa.swan.ac.uk/Record/cronfa54510
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
first_indexed 2020-06-18T19:09:45Z
last_indexed 2021-01-07T04:18:07Z
id cronfa54510
recordtype SURis
fullrecord <?xml version="1.0"?><rfc1807><datestamp>2021-01-06T11:09:32.9084368</datestamp><bib-version>v2</bib-version><id>54510</id><entry>2020-06-18</entry><title>See What I&#x2019;m Saying? Comparing Intelligent Personal Assistant Use for Native and Non-Native Language Speakers</title><swanseaauthors><author><sid>004ef41b90854a57a498549a462f13a0</sid><ORCID>0000-0002-9237-1057</ORCID><firstname>Leigh</firstname><surname>Clark</surname><name>Leigh Clark</name><active>true</active><ethesisStudent>false</ethesisStudent></author></swanseaauthors><date>2020-06-18</date><deptcode>SCS</deptcode><abstract>Limited linguistic coverage for Intelligent Personal Assistants (IPAs) means that many interact in a non-native language. Yet we know little about how IPAs currently support or hinder these users. Through native (L1) and non-native (L2) English speakers interacting with Google Assistant on a smartphone and smart speaker, we aim to understand this more deeply. Interviews revealed that L2 speakers prioritised utterance planning around perceived linguistic limitations, as opposed to L1 speakers prioritising succinctness because of system limitations. L2 speakers see IPAs as insensitive to linguistic needs resulting in failed interaction. L2 speakers clearly preferred using smartphones, as visual feedback supported diagnoses of communication breakdowns whilst allowing time to process query results. Conversely, L1 speakers preferred smart speakers, with audio feedback being seen as sufficient. We discuss the need to tailor the IPA experience for L2 users, emphasising visual feedback whilst reducing the burden of language production.</abstract><type>Conference Paper/Proceeding/Abstract</type><journal>22nd International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services</journal><volume/><journalNumber/><paginationStart>1</paginationStart><paginationEnd>9</paginationEnd><publisher>ACM</publisher><placeOfPublication>New York, NY, USA</placeOfPublication><isbnPrint>9781450375160</isbnPrint><isbnElectronic/><issnPrint/><issnElectronic/><keywords/><publishedDay>5</publishedDay><publishedMonth>10</publishedMonth><publishedYear>2020</publishedYear><publishedDate>2020-10-05</publishedDate><doi>10.1145/3379503.3403563</doi><url/><notes/><college>COLLEGE NANME</college><department>Computer Science</department><CollegeCode>COLLEGE CODE</CollegeCode><DepartmentCode>SCS</DepartmentCode><institution>Swansea University</institution><apcterm/><lastEdited>2021-01-06T11:09:32.9084368</lastEdited><Created>2020-06-18T13:36:12.2573141</Created><path><level id="1">Faculty of Science and Engineering</level><level id="2">School of Mathematics and Computer Science - Computer Science</level></path><authors><author><firstname>Yunhan</firstname><surname>Wu</surname><order>1</order></author><author><firstname>Daniel</firstname><surname>Rough</surname><order>2</order></author><author><firstname>Anna</firstname><surname>Bleakley</surname><order>3</order></author><author><firstname>Justin</firstname><surname>Edwards</surname><order>4</order></author><author><firstname>Orla</firstname><surname>Cooney</surname><order>5</order></author><author><firstname>Philip R.</firstname><surname>Doyle</surname><order>6</order></author><author><firstname>Leigh</firstname><surname>Clark</surname><orcid>0000-0002-9237-1057</orcid><order>7</order></author><author><firstname>Benjamin R.</firstname><surname>Cowan</surname><order>8</order></author></authors><documents><document><filename>54510__17532__5cbb391a57fe416890d69da8db761be1.pdf</filename><originalFilename>2006.06328.pdf</originalFilename><uploaded>2020-06-18T13:38:44.9325192</uploaded><type>Output</type><contentLength>241231</contentLength><contentType>application/pdf</contentType><version>Accepted Manuscript</version><cronfaStatus>true</cronfaStatus><copyrightCorrect>false</copyrightCorrect></document></documents><OutputDurs/></rfc1807>
spelling 2021-01-06T11:09:32.9084368 v2 54510 2020-06-18 See What I’m Saying? Comparing Intelligent Personal Assistant Use for Native and Non-Native Language Speakers 004ef41b90854a57a498549a462f13a0 0000-0002-9237-1057 Leigh Clark Leigh Clark true false 2020-06-18 SCS Limited linguistic coverage for Intelligent Personal Assistants (IPAs) means that many interact in a non-native language. Yet we know little about how IPAs currently support or hinder these users. Through native (L1) and non-native (L2) English speakers interacting with Google Assistant on a smartphone and smart speaker, we aim to understand this more deeply. Interviews revealed that L2 speakers prioritised utterance planning around perceived linguistic limitations, as opposed to L1 speakers prioritising succinctness because of system limitations. L2 speakers see IPAs as insensitive to linguistic needs resulting in failed interaction. L2 speakers clearly preferred using smartphones, as visual feedback supported diagnoses of communication breakdowns whilst allowing time to process query results. Conversely, L1 speakers preferred smart speakers, with audio feedback being seen as sufficient. We discuss the need to tailor the IPA experience for L2 users, emphasising visual feedback whilst reducing the burden of language production. Conference Paper/Proceeding/Abstract 22nd International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services 1 9 ACM New York, NY, USA 9781450375160 5 10 2020 2020-10-05 10.1145/3379503.3403563 COLLEGE NANME Computer Science COLLEGE CODE SCS Swansea University 2021-01-06T11:09:32.9084368 2020-06-18T13:36:12.2573141 Faculty of Science and Engineering School of Mathematics and Computer Science - Computer Science Yunhan Wu 1 Daniel Rough 2 Anna Bleakley 3 Justin Edwards 4 Orla Cooney 5 Philip R. Doyle 6 Leigh Clark 0000-0002-9237-1057 7 Benjamin R. Cowan 8 54510__17532__5cbb391a57fe416890d69da8db761be1.pdf 2006.06328.pdf 2020-06-18T13:38:44.9325192 Output 241231 application/pdf Accepted Manuscript true false
title See What I’m Saying? Comparing Intelligent Personal Assistant Use for Native and Non-Native Language Speakers
spellingShingle See What I’m Saying? Comparing Intelligent Personal Assistant Use for Native and Non-Native Language Speakers
Leigh Clark
title_short See What I’m Saying? Comparing Intelligent Personal Assistant Use for Native and Non-Native Language Speakers
title_full See What I’m Saying? Comparing Intelligent Personal Assistant Use for Native and Non-Native Language Speakers
title_fullStr See What I’m Saying? Comparing Intelligent Personal Assistant Use for Native and Non-Native Language Speakers
title_full_unstemmed See What I’m Saying? Comparing Intelligent Personal Assistant Use for Native and Non-Native Language Speakers
title_sort See What I’m Saying? Comparing Intelligent Personal Assistant Use for Native and Non-Native Language Speakers
author_id_str_mv 004ef41b90854a57a498549a462f13a0
author_id_fullname_str_mv 004ef41b90854a57a498549a462f13a0_***_Leigh Clark
author Leigh Clark
author2 Yunhan Wu
Daniel Rough
Anna Bleakley
Justin Edwards
Orla Cooney
Philip R. Doyle
Leigh Clark
Benjamin R. Cowan
format Conference Paper/Proceeding/Abstract
container_title 22nd International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services
container_start_page 1
publishDate 2020
institution Swansea University
isbn 9781450375160
doi_str_mv 10.1145/3379503.3403563
publisher ACM
college_str Faculty of Science and Engineering
hierarchytype
hierarchy_top_id facultyofscienceandengineering
hierarchy_top_title Faculty of Science and Engineering
hierarchy_parent_id facultyofscienceandengineering
hierarchy_parent_title Faculty of Science and Engineering
department_str School of Mathematics and Computer Science - Computer Science{{{_:::_}}}Faculty of Science and Engineering{{{_:::_}}}School of Mathematics and Computer Science - Computer Science
document_store_str 1
active_str 0
description Limited linguistic coverage for Intelligent Personal Assistants (IPAs) means that many interact in a non-native language. Yet we know little about how IPAs currently support or hinder these users. Through native (L1) and non-native (L2) English speakers interacting with Google Assistant on a smartphone and smart speaker, we aim to understand this more deeply. Interviews revealed that L2 speakers prioritised utterance planning around perceived linguistic limitations, as opposed to L1 speakers prioritising succinctness because of system limitations. L2 speakers see IPAs as insensitive to linguistic needs resulting in failed interaction. L2 speakers clearly preferred using smartphones, as visual feedback supported diagnoses of communication breakdowns whilst allowing time to process query results. Conversely, L1 speakers preferred smart speakers, with audio feedback being seen as sufficient. We discuss the need to tailor the IPA experience for L2 users, emphasising visual feedback whilst reducing the burden of language production.
published_date 2020-10-05T04:08:06Z
_version_ 1763753576125956096
score 11.01628

Similar Items