Document annotation: to write, type or speak?

Abstract

Although the visual display unit (VDU) is becoming an increasingly popular means of displaying documents, users often show a strong preference for the "hard-copy" medium of document presentation when it comes to reading activities such as those that involve proof-reading or refereeing the document. This is partly attributed to the difficulties of annotating documents presented in the electronic medium. Voice recording may be a more acceptable medium for annotating documents that are presented on VDUs, as it overcomes many of the problems associated with the typed annotation of electronic documents. Experiment 1 compared two computer-based annotation media (typed and spoken input) with the method of writing annotations on the document. Findings suggested that writing was a superior method of annotation to the other media in terms of number of annotations elicited, speed of recording and user preference. Experiment 2 differed from the first experiment in the way in which written annotations were recorded and in the amount of pre-trial practice given to subjects. In the second experiment voice resulted in shorter task completion times than either writing or typing. This is taken as limited support for a theory that a small amount of pre-trial practice is of greater benefit to the utility of a voice annotation facility than it is to a facility for typing annotations. The majority of differences between writing and the other conditions observed in Experiment 1 were not found in Experiment 2. The contrast between the two sets of results is discussed in terms of the subjects' familiarity with the methods of annotation involved and the advantages of a facility for annotating on the document. The discussion concludes with a set of guide-lines for the implementation of a voice annotation facility.