Voice Recognition - Will It Throw Transcription Companies On The Scrap Heap?

If I had a hundred pounds for every timeprogramme and you'll see how difficult a skill that
someone told me that transcription servicesis to master. Add on the time taken at the end
would soon be obsolete and that everyone wouldto proofread and tidy up the Word document and
be using voice recognition software, I wouldn'tit becomes clear that it would take far longer
need to run a business! However, I'm firmlythan the original interview length, and no different
convinced that voice recognition software in itsfrom the time taken by a professional transcriber
current form is not a substitute for transcriptionto complete the transcription. Is that a valuable
services. But then I would say that, wouldn't I?and productive use of your time? Magnify that
Below are some of the reasons why I remaintime and effort many times if you then tried to
unconvinced that it will replace me quite yet.tackle 'speaking' a focus group, especially if the
Voice recognition software currently comes inrecording is less than clear.
two forms - Dragon Naturally Speaking and IBM'sAnother major factor when considering speech
ViaVoice. As well as being used to give arecognition software is its inability to judge which
computer commands (e.g. to save a file), it canhomonyms should be used. The latest versions
also be used to convert speech straight into aare apparently now capable of recognising the
Word document. However, the main disadvantagemore common ones in simple sentences, such as
is that voice recognition software is a 'dog fordeciding whether it's there or their. However, long,
one master' only. It's possible to use the softwarecomplicated sentences can defeat it. All this adds
successfully for dictation but it can't cope withto your proofreading time at the end. You also
even one-to-one interviews and would probablyneed to consider how the software will tackle
go into meltdown if you tried it with groupcommands for punctuation or formatting certain
meetings or focus groups. The software needs towords in bold, for example. Most programmes
be trained to become used to one voice. Asking itrequire you to leave a pause between the
to recognise and accurately transcribe thecommand and the next chunk of 'text'. If the
different voice of your interviewee as well aspause isn't long enough, you'll find those
your own questions, or the multiple voices of acommands entered as part of the text itself,
group, is simply not possible at the moment. Evenwhich will need to be edited out later. For an
with one voice dictation, the software still needsinterview format, you will need to indicate a
to be corrected and trained to recognise new andchange of speaker with a new line and initials, and
unfamiliar words or technical terms or names.a tab command. Even if you just decide to enter
The only way to use voice recognition softwarea change of speaker on a new line and tidy it up
effectively for an interview situation would be toafterwards, this all adds to the time taken.
listen to the recording and re-speak everythingAllegedly, one of the latest versions (Naturally
you hear - both questions and responses.Speaking) will also punctuate for you - deciding
Obviously, this would be very time consuming,where all the commas and full stops go. Be
having to stop and start the recording so thatprepared to correct this later - its idea of
you can 'speak' what you're hearing. Essentially,punctuation is not mine!
you're attempting to perform simultaneous'Naturally Speaking', as it were, I'm biased! But I'm
translation - concentrating on listening to someoneconvinced that voice recognition software is a
else's speech, while saying those words a fewuseful tool fit for a specific purpose, but that
seconds later but without losing what's being saidpurpose is not yet transcription of all recordings in
next. Try it with a recorded TV or radioall circumstances.