[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ skip to main content
10.1145/3464385.3464735acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschitalyConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

VoiceWriting: a completely speech-based text editor

Published: 13 July 2021 Publication History

Abstract

Assistive technologies, mostly based on speech recognition and synthesis, help visually-impaired people writing text on digital devices. However, they do not fully support non-sequential text editing without the use of sight. This paper discusses the design of the interaction protocol underlying the first prototype of a text editor that is especially designed for people with very poor eyesight. It does not require the visual localization of text for non-sequential editing of multiple-paragraph documents and only exploits voice and ”uninterpreted” keyboard input, namely the outmoded ”press any key” for mode-switching. Preliminary tests complete the paper.

References

[1]
[n.d.]. Pioneering Speech Recognition. http://www.ibm.com/ibm/history/ibm100/us/en/icons/speechreco/. Accessed: 2021-02-25.
[2]
John P Chin, Virginia A Diehl, and Kent L Norman. 1988. Development of an instrument measuring user satisfaction of the human-computer interface. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems. 213–218.
[3]
Ben D Harper and Kent L Norman. 1993. Improving user satisfaction: The questionnaire for user interaction satisfaction version 5.5. In Proceedings of the 1st Annual Mid-Atlantic Human Factors Conference. 224–228.
[4]
Md Nafiz Hasan Khan, Md Amit Hasan Arovi, Hasan Mahmud, Md Kamrul Hasan, and Husne Ara Rubaiyeat. 2015. Speech based text correction tool for the visually impaired. In 2015 18th International Conference on Computer and Information Technology (ICCIT). IEEE, 150–155.
[5]
Akshi Kumar, Sukriti Verma, and Himanshu Mangla. 2018. A survey of deep learning techniques in speech recognition. In 2018 International Conference on Advances in Computing, Communication Control and Networking (ICACCCN). IEEE, 179–185.
[6]
Gustavo López, Luis Quesada, and Luis A Guerrero. 2017. Alexa vs. Siri vs. Cortana vs. Google Assistant: a comparison of speech-based natural user interfaces. In International Conference on Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics. Springer, 241–250.
[7]
Melanie Pinola. 2011. Speech recognition through the decades: How we ended up with siri. Web log post. techHive. IDGtechNetwork 2 (2011).
[8]
Alexander I Rudnicky, Alexander G Hauptmann, and Kai-Fu Lee. 1994. Survey of current speech technology. Commun. ACM 37, 3 (1994), 52–57.
[9]
Caleb Southern, James Clawson, Brian Frey, Gregory Abowd, and Mario Romero. 2012. An evaluation of BrailleTouch: mobile touchscreen text entry for the visually impaired. In Proceedings of the 14th international conference on Human-computer interaction with mobile devices and services. 317–326.
[10]
Daniel Wigdor and Dennis Wixon. 2011. Brave NUI world: designing natural user interfaces for touch and gesture. Elsevier.

Cited By

View all
  • (2022)A Natural Human-Drone Embodied Interface: Empirical Comparison With a Traditional InterfaceFrontiers in Neurorobotics10.3389/fnbot.2022.89885916Online publication date: 14-Oct-2022

Recommendations

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Other conferences
CHItaly '21: Proceedings of the 14th Biannual Conference of the Italian SIGCHI Chapter
July 2021
237 pages
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 13 July 2021

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. Poor eyesight
  2. design for accessibility
  3. text editing

Qualifiers

  • Research-article
  • Research
  • Refereed limited

Conference

CHItaly '21

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 109 of 242 submissions, 45%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)14
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 11 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2022)A Natural Human-Drone Embodied Interface: Empirical Comparison With a Traditional InterfaceFrontiers in Neurorobotics10.3389/fnbot.2022.89885916Online publication date: 14-Oct-2022

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format.

HTML Format

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media