cs.HCOct 27, 2026

"It Would Make a Geordie Feel at Home": Regional Accent Perceptions and Speech Accommodation in Voice AI

Authors: Dana Serditova, Kevin Tang, Jochen Steffens

Organizations: University of Regensburg, Faculty of Languages, Literature, and Cultures, Department of English and American Studies, Regensburg, 93040, Bavaria, Germany · Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Institute of English and American Studies, Department English Language and Linguistics, Düsseldorf, 40225, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany · University of Florida, Department of Linguistics, Gainesville, 32611-5454, Florida, U.S.A. · University of Applied Sciences Düsseldorf, Faculty of Media, Institute of Sound and Vibration Engineering (ISAVE), Düsseldorf, 40476, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany

Read PDF
Ask AI
Cite

Copy citation

DOINot available for this paper

Abstract

Automatic speech recognition (ASR) systems often perform less accurately for speakers of regional dialects, but less is known about how users respond to these limitations and how regional voices produced by voice assistants (VAs) are evaluated through a sociolinguistic lens. This study investigates these issues among speakers of Newcastle English (Geordies), examining both linguistic accommodation to voice technologies and perceptions of regional versus mainstream-accented VA voices. Participants interacted with a simulated VA that spoke either Newcastle English or Standard Southern British English (SSBE). They subsequently completed semi-structured interviews about their experiences with the experimental VA and voice technologies, language use, accent attitudes, and place orientation. The findings reveal a two-way process of sociolinguistic bias. The Geordie VA was associated with familiarity, warmth, personality, and local belonging, but also with concerns about professionalism and authority, whereas the SSBE voice was perceived as more neutral, clear, and credible. Participants also reported adapting their speech when voice technologies failed to recognise them, most commonly by shifting to a more mainstream accent, enunciating more clearly, and speaking more slowly. These strategies are similar to accommodation in human-human interaction and reflect users' perceptions of what technologies can recognise, also known as perceived intelligibility pressures. Overall, the findings demonstrate that voice technologies can reproduce existing accent biases both by encouraging users to suppress regional features and by activating established social stereotypes through synthetic voices. The study positions sociolinguistics as a bridge between understanding human-AI interaction and designing inclusive technologies around users' own linguistic priorities.

More in this topic

Voice Agent Evaluation

Voice agent evaluation measures how reliably spoken AI systems understand, respond, take actions, and recover in real interactions.

See all 46 papers

Explore similar work

CardsList
Mar 25, 2026

A Sociolinguistic Analysis of Automatic Speech Recognition Bias in Newcastle English

Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR) systems are widely used in everyday communication, education, healthcare, and industry, yet their performance remains uneven across speakers, particularly when dialectal variation diverges from the mainstream accents represented in training data. This study investigates ASR bias through a sociolinguistic analysis of Newcastle English, a regional variety of North-East England that has been shown to challenge current speech recognition technologies. Using spontaneous speech from the Diachronic Electronic Corpus of Tyneside English (DECTE), we evaluate the output of a state-of-the-art commercial ASR system and conduct a fine-grained analysis of more than 3,000 transcription errors. Errors are classified by linguistic domain and examined in relation to social variables including gender, age, and socioeconomic status. In addition, an acoustic case study of selected vowel features demonstrates how gradient phonetic variation contributes directly to misrecognition. The results show that phonological variation accounts for the majority of errors, with recurrent failures linked to dialect-specific features like vowel quality and glottalisation, as well as local vocabulary and non-standard grammatical forms. Error rates also vary across social groups, with higher error frequencies observed for men and for speakers at the extremes of the age spectrum. These findings indicate that ASR errors are not random but socially patterned and can be explained from a sociolinguistic perspective. Thus, the study demonstrates the importance of incorporating sociolinguistic expertise into the evaluation and development of speech technologies and argues that more equitable ASR systems require explicit attention to dialectal variation and community-based speech data.

Dana Serditova, Kevin Tang

University of Regensburg, Faculty of Languages, Literature, and Cultures, Department of English and American Studies, Regensburg, 93040, Bavaria, Germany · Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Institute of English and American Studies, Department English Language and Linguistics, Düsseldorf, 40225, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany · University of Florida, Department of Linguistics, Gainesville, 32611-5454, Florida, U.S.A.

Demographic Bias in ASRAutomatic Speech RecognitionASR Evaluation
AskPDF
Apr 22, 2026

"This Wasn't Made for Me": Recentering User Experience and Emotional Impact in the Evaluation of ASR Bias

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.

Siyu Liang, Alicia Beckford Wassink

University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA

Algorithmic FairnessDemographic Bias in ASRAutomatic Speech Recognition
AskPDF
Mar 19, 2026

From Seeing it to Experiencing it: Interactive Evaluation of Intersectional Voice Bias in Human-AI Speech Interaction

SpeechLLMs process spoken language directly from audio, but accent and vocal identity cues can lead to biased behaviour. Current bias evaluations often miss how such bias manifests in end-to-end speech interactions and how users experience it. We distinguish quality-of-service disparities (e.g., off-topic or low-effort responses) from content-level bias in coherent outputs, and examine intersectional effects of accent and perceived gender. In this work, we explore a two-part evaluation approach: (1) a controlled test cohort spanning six accents and two gender presentations, analysed with judge-free prompt-response metrics, and (2) an interactive study design using voice conversion to let users experience identical content through different vocal identities. Across two studies (Interactive, N=24; Observational, N=19), we find that voice conversion increases trust and acceptability for benign responses and encourages perspective-taking, while automated analysis in search of quality-of-service disparities, reveals {accent x gender} disparities in alignment and verbosity across SpeechLLMs. These results highlight voice conversion for probing and experiencing intersectional voice bias while our evaluation suite provides richer bias evaluations for spoken conversational AI.

Shree Harsha Bokkahalli Satish, Maria Teleki, Christoph Minixhofer +3

KTH Royal Institute of Technology Stockholm, Sweden · Texas A&M University College Station, USA · University of Edinburgh Edinburgh, UK

Intersectional Bias in Language ModelsLanguage Model Bias EvaluationSpeech Language ModelsSpoken Dialogue Systems
AskPDF