The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Speech versus keying in command and control: effect of concurrent tasking.

Damper, R.I., Tranchant, M.A. and Lewis, S.M. (1996) Speech versus keying in command and control: effect of concurrent tasking. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 45, (3), pp. 337-348. (doi:10.1006/ijhc.1996.0055).

Record type: Article


As a result of Poock's influential work in the early 1980s, command and control is generally believed to be one specific application where speech input holds great advantages over keyed data entry. However, a recent paper (Damper & Wood, 1995 “Speech versus keying in command and control applications ”,International Journal of Human-Computer Studies,42,289-305) has questioned this interpretation of Poock’s data because the experimental conditions seemed to bias the results against keyed entry. While Damper and Wood modelled their experiments on Poock's, however, there were important differences which mean that their conclusions are uncertain. The objective of the work reported here was to determine if the major difference-the omission of concurrent, secondary tasking from their study-could explain Damper and Wood's observed superiority of keying over speech.
Simulated command and control experiments are described in which speech input, abbreviated command keying and full command keying are compared under dual-task conditions. We find that speech input is no faster (a nonsignificant 1.23% difference) and enormously more error-prone (1038%, highly significant) than abbreviated keying for the primary data entry task, but allows somewhat more (11.32%, not significant) of a secondary information-transcription task to be completed. Full keying has no advantages whatsoever: we believe that this confirms the methodological flaw in Poock's work. If recognizer errors (as opposed to speaker errors) are discounted, however, speech shows a clear superiority over keying. This indicates that speech input has potential for the future-especially for high workload situations involving concurrent tasks-if the technology can be developed to the point where most errors are attributable to the speaker rather than to the recognizer.

Full text not available from this repository.

More information

Published date: 1996
Organisations: Statistics


Local EPrints ID: 30053
PURE UUID: 9d2d2083-a6f0-43e2-8c9c-3a7f8ca08847

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 16 Mar 2007
Last modified: 17 Jul 2017 15:55

Export record



Author: R.I. Damper
Author: M.A. Tranchant
Author: S.M. Lewis

University divisions

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton:

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.