Adult ESL learners report above-neutral perceptions of ASR as a writing tool on usefulness, ease of use, and intention to use¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2021 · checked against its sources 2026-10-08 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? After training and two ASR-based writing tasks, 17 ESL students' TAM survey means for perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and intention to use were all above the neutrality level of four on a seven-point scale. → Johnson 2021

Evidence¶

Johnson 2021¶

Johnson, C., & Cardoso, W. (2021). Speaking to write: examining language learners’ acceptance of automatic speech recognition as a writing tool. In N. Zoghlami et al. (Eds), CALL and professionalisation: short papers from EUROCALL 2021 (pp. 167-171). Research-publishing.net. https://doi.org/10.14705/rpnet.2021.54.1327

q2 · i? · associational · r1

Mixed-methods one-shot study: 17 ESL students in a university EAP class trained on Google voice typing completed two writing tasks, then a TAM-informed survey. Descriptive means were above neutrality; the article reports no inferential tests or effect sizes.

"an analysis of the TAM survey showed positive perceptions, as the means of the items for each category were above the level of neutrality (i.e . four), indicating that the users saw the technology as useful, easy to use, and consequently, they intend to use it again"

Studies bearing on this claim¶

Does dictating help learners get text written, compared with typing it? This table gathers the studies behind this claim and the 5 narrower claims that bear on it: 2 distinct studies (2 associational), q2–q3, 0 of 2 with an effect size coded. One row per study, codes as each entry records them; no effect is averaged and no verdict is drawn. Built by scripts/synthesize_claim.py from eval/synthesis/; a row that looks wrong is fixed on the claim it comes from.

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Through Chapelle's CALL evaluation criteria, participants experienced ASR writing as useful, authentic, meaning-focused, and matched to their proficiency level — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Among TAM constructs, result demonstrability, intention to use, and ease of use received the highest ratings while output quality was lowest — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Interviews reveal ESL learners valued ASR for bypassing orthography and grammar concerns, pronunciation practice, self-efficacy, and user-friendly voice commands — related
• Some ESL learners felt their English was not high enough to use ASR because their speech was not always intelligible to it, although overall perceived usefulness was positive — related
• In a user study with 12 participants, teachers rated AdaPT positively across all dimensions, with mean ratings above the neutral baseline of 4 — related
• Students reported mixed, task-dependent perceptions of the efficiency and speed of voice versus text input — related
• Teachers rate AI-interaction training as useful and relevant and report positive adoption intentions — related
• Older adults rate the blended LMS workshop positively on ease of use, perceived usefulness, attitude toward using, and intention to use — related