Decolonizing Linguistic Policies in Automated Speech Recognition: A Framework for Cross-Culturally Competent Speech AI

Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR) is increasingly used to document clinical encounters, yet its reliability in multilingual and demographically diverse Indian healthcare context remains largely unknown. In this study, we first conduct the systematic audit of ASR performance on real-world psychiatric interview data spanning Kannada, Hindi and Indian English, comparing eight state-of-the-art models including IndicWhisper, WhisperLargeV3, Sarvam, GoogleS2T, Gemma3n, OmniLingual, Vaani, and Gemini. Our results reveal substantial variability across models and languages, with some systems performing competitively in Indian English but failing in regional speech. We further fine-tune two of the best performing opensource models, i.e., Gemma3n and OmniLingual, using various methods. With this, we uncover systematic performance gaps tied to speaker role and gender, raising concerns about equitable deployment in clinical settings, which are further mitigated by fairness-aware fine-tuning. To this end, we propose SamaVaani, a unified debiasing technique that simultaneously improves ASR performance and improves fairness across demographic groups.

Studies on bias in Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR) tend to focus on reporting error rates for speakers of underrepresented dialects, yet less research examines the human side of system bias: how do system failures shape users' lived experiences, how do users feel about and react to them, and what emotional toll do these repeated failures exact? We conducted user experience studies across four U.S. locations (Atlanta, Gulf Coast, Miami Beach, and Tucson) representing distinct English dialect communities. Our findings reveal that most participants report technologies fail to consider their cultural backgrounds and require constant adjustment to achieve basic functionality. Despite these experiences, participants maintain high expectations for ASR performance and express strong willingness to contribute to model improvement. Qualitative analysis of open-ended narratives exposes the deeper costs of these failures. Participants report frustration, annoyance, and feelings of inadequacy, yet the emotional impact extends beyond momentary reactions. Participants recognize that systems were not designed for them, yet often internalize failures as personal inadequacy despite this critical awareness. They perform extensive invisible labor, including code-switching, hyper-articulation, and emotional management, to make failing systems functional. Meanwhile, their linguistic and cultural knowledge remains unrecognized by technologies that encode particular varieties as standard while rendering others marginal. These findings demonstrate that algorithmic fairness assessments based on accuracy metrics alone miss critical dimensions of harm: the emotional labor of managing repeated technological rejection, the cognitive burden of constant self-monitoring, and the psychological toll of feeling inadequate in one's native language variety.

While Large Language Model (LLM) based Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR) enables seamless multilingual use, models often misidentify the output language, compromising transcription fidelity and downstream application quality. To preserve flexibility and code-switching capabilities, we propose a soft prompting approach that hints at potential spoken languages without strictly constraining the output. We formally define this challenge as a lack of language adherence, introduce a novel metric to quantify violations, and evaluate three mitigation strategies: (1) zero-shot prompting for robust guidance under uncertainty, (2) supervised fine-tuning (SFT) to improve prompt adherence, and (3) Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning to enforce adherence during decoding. We present a comparative analysis of these methods across multiple languages, evaluating effectiveness in reducing the language violation while maintaining overall ASR performance. Finally, we discuss trade-offs to guide strategy selection under various compute constraints.