Skip to main content
Log in

Shifting the Design Philosophy of Spoken Natural Language Dialogue: From Invisible to Transparent Systems

  • Published:
International Journal of Speech Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Spoken natural language interfaces are characterized by a high degree of opacity. This characteristic leads many new users to converse with the machine on the basis of an inaccurate image of the system, which results in numerous dysfunctions and failures in the human-machine spoken dialogue. The application of the principle of transparency aims to correct this problem by enabling the system to make it “visible” (it can, so to speak, be seen “from the inside”). This report presents a study that compares two versions of the same spoken dialogue system that differ only by some of their dialogue strategies. In particular, one version of this system starts the dialogue with a recall of the main system's function followed by an open-ended prompt, while the other version only produces an open-ended prompt (What can I do for you?). Moreover, one version of this system makes explicit some possible actions in specific dialogue contexts, while the other version leaves these possible actions implicit. These strategies were compared by having a group of 28 users test them in real conditions of use. The results highlight that transparency strategies can help users in formulating simple and acceptable requests, satisfying their goals more easily while provoking less recognition and comprehension errors.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bernsen, N.O., Dybkjaer, H., and Dybkjaer, L. (1996). Cooperativity in human-machine and human-human spoken dialogue. Discourse Processes, 21:213–236.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyce, S.J. and Gorin, A.L. (1996). User interface issues for natural spoken dialog systems. Proceedings of the ISSD'96 International Symposium on Spoken Dialog, Philadelphia, pp. 65–68.

  • Brennan, S.E. and Hulteen, E.A. (1995). Interaction and feedback in a spoken language system: A theoretical framework. Knowledge-Based Systems, 8(2/3):143–151.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, B., Novick, D.G., and Sutton, S. (1996). Systematic design of spoken prompts. Proceedings of CHI'96, Vancouver, April 13- 18. ACM Press, pp. 157–164.

  • Hauptmann, A.G. and Rudnicky, A.I. (1988). Talking to computers: Anempirical investigation. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 28:583–604.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kamm, C. (1994). User interfaces for voice applications. In D.B. Roe and J.G. Wilpon (Eds.), Voice Communication between Humans and Machines. Washington: National Academy Press, pp. 422–442.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kamm, C., Litman, D.J., and Walker, M.A. (1998). From novice to expert: The effect of tutorial on user expertise with spoken dialogue systems. In H.M. Robert and R.R. Jordi (Eds.), Proceedings of ICSLP'98, Australian Speech Science and Technology Association, pp. 1211–1214.

  • Karis, D. and Dobroth, K.M. (1991). Automating services with speech recognition over the public switched telephone network: Human factors considerations. IEEE Journal of Selected Areas in Communications, 9(4):574–585.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karsenty, L. (1997). Cognitive analysis of user behaviors in spoken human-computer dialogue. (Research report IRIT). Contract France Télécom R&D (CNET) no. 96-75A3. Oct. 1997 (in French).

  • Karsenty, L. (1999). Application of the transparency principle to human-computer telephone dialogues. (Research report IRIT). Contract France Télécom R&D (CNET) no. 99-1B-079, Oct. 1999.

  • Karsenty, L. (2001). Adapting verbal protocol methods to investigate speech systems use. Applied Ergonomics, 32(1):15–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luzzati, D. and Neel, F. (1989). Dialogue behaviour induced by the machine. Proceedings of the European Conference on Speech Communication Technology (EUROSPEECH'89), CEP, pp. 601–604.

  • Maass, S. (1983). Why systems transparency? In T.R. Green, S.J. Payne, and G.C. Ven DerVeer (Eds.), The Psychology of Computer Use. London: Academic Press, pp. 19–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oviatt, S.L., Cohen, P.R., and Wang, M.Q. (1994). Toward interface design for human language technology: Modality and structure as determinants of linguistic complexity. Speech Communication, 15:283–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sadek, D., Ferrieux, A., Cozannet, A., Bretier, P., and Panaget, F. (1996). Effective human-computer cooperative spoken dialogue: The AGS demonstrator. Proceedings of ICSLP'96, Philadelphia.

  • Spitz, J. (1991). Collection and analysis of data from real users: Implications for speech recognition/understanding systems. Proceedings of the Fourth DARPA Speech and Natural Language Workshop, Pacific Grove, California, Feb. 1991. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann, pp. 164–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomson, D.L. and Wisowaty, J.J. (1999). User confusion in natural language services. Proceedings of ESCA Workshop on Interactive Dialogue in Multimodal Systems, Kloster Irrsee, Germany, June 22-25, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tucker, P. and Jones, D.M. (1991). Voice as interface: An overview. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 3(2):145–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yankelovich, N. (1996). How do users know what to say? ACM Interactions, 3(6):32–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zoltan-Ford, E. (1991). How to get people to say and type what computers can understand. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 34:527–547.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Karsenty, L. Shifting the Design Philosophy of Spoken Natural Language Dialogue: From Invisible to Transparent Systems. International Journal of Speech Technology 5, 147–157 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015472130944

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015472130944

Navigation