Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Philip Tucker

dblp:32/892 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
2as first author
0since 2021 · last 1993
0000-0002-8105-0901ORCID · corroborated

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 2 · 2 first-author

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
1 paper
Collaborative and social computing · 100%

Topics — the 1 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Collaborative and social computing
document annotation
0.011993
Document Annotation: To Write, Type or Speak? · Int. J. Man Mach. Stud. 1993
YearPublicationVenuePosition
1993 Document Annotation: To Write, Type or Speak?
Philip Tucker, Dylan M. Jones
Int. J. Man Mach. Stud.1
1991 Voice as interface: An overview
abstract
Speech, as a medium for communicating with computers, has several potential advantages, and its introduction may have far‐reaching implications for the evolution of information technology. Yet, despite the availability of speech I/O devices over the past few years, their introduction into day‐today use has been relatively slow. A human factors perspective helps to explain the predominance of the visual/manual interface, and the reasons for its preference over speech. This view reflects fundamental differences between the two modes of communication. However, human factors also suggest that much can be done to improve the usability of speech systems. Broad guidelines for the use of speech‐output devices are detailed, and include criteria for the assignment of output either to the visual or auditory channel. The human factors of synthetic speech are discussed, in terms of enhancing both its intelligibility and its acceptability to users. Performance measures of automatic speech recognition (ASR) technology must account for the sensitivity of such devices to extraneous factors. A description of contemporary ASR technology serves as a basis for the explanation of this sensitivity, and of the limited performance of such devices. Guidelines for the implementation of ASR technology are described that address both user behavior and the interaction of the device with its environment. Modality effects upon user behavior in a man‐machine dialogue are described.
Philip Tucker, Dylan M. Jones
Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact.1