Sound Meets “Interface”: The Technical Script of Human-Machine Communication and the Imaginaries of Sonic Interfaces

LIU Tingzhi, YAO Yao

Chinese Journal of Journalism & Communication ›› 2025, Vol. 47 ›› Issue (12) : 127-148.

PDF(1674 KB)
PDF(1674 KB)
Chinese Journal of Journalism & Communication ›› 2025, Vol. 47 ›› Issue (12) : 127-148.
Research Articles

Sound Meets “Interface”: The Technical Script of Human-Machine Communication and the Imaginaries of Sonic Interfaces

Author information +
History +

Abstract

The sound interface is ubiquitous yet often remains inconspicuous. Moving beyond the visual-centric paradigm, this study adopts a procedural perspective of the interface, focusing on voice interfaces embedded in domestic smartphones and embodied as intelligent assistants. It explores their formation, maintenance, and the complex interface effects triggered by sound media. Through discursive interface analysis and semi-structured interviews, the study finds that within the “black box”, the interface modifies users’ spoken language based on a cybernetic technical logic, simulating interpersonal communication while masking the programmed nature of interactions. In the interactive practices, users engage in continuous efforts to address interface failures or breakdowns and to reconcile the contradictions arising from the dual nature of voice—as both an interactive tool and a medium of communication. Furthermore, as a relational medium that constructs the relationship between humans and the technological environment, sound activates an auditory turn in interface interaction and a paradox in technological perception. While users rationally assess the semantic limitations of voice assistants, they also develop imaginative conceptions of technology as possessing a sense of life. This study conceptualizes voice-dominated human-computer interaction as “acoustic interface communication”, emphasizing the urgent need to recognize the unique significance of sound in human-machine interfaces.

Key words

Sound interface / technical script / interactive practices / human-machine communication

Cite this article

Download Citations
LIU Tingzhi , YAO Yao. Sound Meets “Interface”: The Technical Script of Human-Machine Communication and the Imaginaries of Sonic Interfaces[J]. Chinese Journal of Journalism & Communication. 2025, 47(12): 127-148

References

[1]
百度AI交互设计院(2018年1月22日). 拿什么名字唤醒你?我的智能小伙伴. https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/SuXKyhqFD4x5Yikbn9OEDg
[2]
布鲁诺·拉图尔(1999/2024). 《潘多拉的希望:科学论中的实在》(史晨,刘兆晖,刘鹏译). 上海文艺出版社.
[3]
季凌霄(2019). 从“声景”思考传播:声音、空间与听觉感官文化. 《国际新闻界》,(3),24-41.
[4]
梁君健, 陈凯宁(2021). 自我的技术:理想用户的技术剧本与手机厂商的技术意识形态. 《新闻与传播研究》,(3),75-91+127.
[5]
列夫·马诺维奇(2001/2020). 《新媒体的语言》(车琳译). 贵州人民出版社.
[6]
罗龙翔, 王兵, 王秀丽(2024). 人机传播的失灵与修复:家庭成员“共同媒介参与”的视频分析研究. 《国际新闻界》,(8),27-49.
[7]
N. 凯瑟琳·海尔斯.(2005/2025). 《我的母亲是计算机:数字主体与文学文本》(陈静译). 南京大学出版社.
[8]
全燕(2023). 重组人机——行动者网络中的人机传播研究. 《新闻与传播研究》,(10),39-51+127.
[9]
孙玮, 程陶然(2023). 人工智能界面:系统交互的革新. 《新闻记者》,(8),3-12+61.
[10]
陶锋, 刘星辰(2024). 从人机对话到人机交往——人工智能大语言模型的哲学反思. 《社会科学战线》,(5),188-199+282+294.
[11]
王婧(2023). 从“声景”到“声境”:作为媒介的声音. 《国际新闻界》,(12),136-151.
[12]
W.J.T.米歇尔, 马克·B.N. 汉森(主编)(2010/2019). 《媒介研究批评术语集》(肖腊梅,胡晓华译). 南京大学出版社.
[13]
沃尔特·翁(1982/2008). 《口语文化与书面文化: 语词的技术化》(何道宽译). 北京大学出版社.
[14]
西蒙尼·纳塔莱(2021/2023). 《媒介的欺骗性: 后图灵时代的人工智能和社会生活》(汪让译). 复旦大学出版社.
[15]
小爱同学(2021年2月22日). 别忘记随时随地呼叫小爱同学,学霸进阶路上有我时刻相随哦. https://weibo.com/6345071194/4607441440866382
[16]
小布助手(2021年7月1日). 不懂情绪,还当什么AI助手. https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/EBypjX4H9chzeNd5WSat_A
[17]
小布助手(2021年3月11日). 十年理想之作OPPO Find X3系列发布,搭载小布十大诚意功能. https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/LYDLlIfrykPUXpOr2Qq3oQ
[18]
小布助手(2022年6月16日). 全家桶,嗨起来. https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/Cvj5szSws9ubsl6HzNHPeQ
[19]
小米小爱同学(2021年8月23日). 超级拟人:小爱同学这个声音,太像真人啦. https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/JKnt2xhe7MIOZVxKI8ypXw
[20]
小米小爱同学(2021年1月29日). 小米AI技术曝光!一文看懂小爱同学进化的奥秘. https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/4Cpccevw6YKcR2UzMIkXBA
[21]
小米小爱同学(2025年3月7日). 今天学点新人设. https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/MIQD4OUyYigbDi5ABwJYSQ
[22]
詹姆斯·威廉·凯瑞(1989/2019). 《作为文化的传播:“媒介与社会”论文集》(丁未译). 中国人民大学出版社.
[23]
章戈浩(2020). 网页隐喻与处理超文本的姿态. 《国际新闻界》,(11),25-38.
[24]
赵立兵(2025). 触屏之“感”:数字媒介使用的界面交互与身体觉知. 《新闻记者》,(5),83-96.
[25]
Akrich, M. (1992). The de-scription of technical objects. In W. E. Bijker & J. Law (Eds.), Shaping technology/building society: Studies in sociotechnical change (pp.205-224). The MIT Press.
[26]
Black, D. (2019). Digital interfacing: Action and perception through technology. Routledge.
[27]
Bucher, T. (2014). About a bot: Hoax, fake, performance art. M/C Journal, 17(3).
[28]
Cambre, J., & Kulkarni, C. (2019). One voice fits all? Social implications and research challenges of designing voices for smart devices. Proceedings of the ACM on human-computer interaction, 3(CSCW), 1-19.
[29]
Carpentier, N. (2017). The discursive-material knot: Cyprus in conflict and community media. Peter Lang.
[30]
Connor, S. (1997). The modern auditory I. In R. Porter (Ed.), Rewriting the self: Histories from the Renaissance to the present (pp.203-223). Routledge.
[31]
Connor, S. (2000). Dumbstruck: A cultural history of ventriloquism. Oxford University Press.
[32]
Cox, T. J. (2018). Now you’re talking: Human conversation from the Neanderthals to artificial intelligence. The Bodley Head.
[33]
Dingemanse, M., & Enfield, N. J. (2024). Interactive repair and the foundations of language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 28(1), 30-42.
[34]
Distelmeyer, J. (2018). Drawing connections-How interfaces matter. Interface Critique, (1), 22-32.
[35]
Drucker, J. (2011). Humanities approaches to interface theory. Culture Machine, 12(1), 1-20.
[36]
Faber, L. W. (2020). The computer’s voice: From Star Trek to Siri. University of Minnesota Press.
[37]
Galloway, A. R. (2012). The interface effect. Polity.
[38]
Gaver, W. W. (1989). The SonicFinder: An interface that uses auditory icons. Human-Computer Interaction, 4(1), 67-94.
[39]
Guzman, A. L. (2015). Imagining the voice in the machine: The ontology of digital social agents [Doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois Chicago]. https://indigo.uic.edu/articles/thesis/Imagining_the_Voice_in_the_Machine_The_Ontology_of_Digital_Social_Agents/10822964?file=19332413
[40]
Guzman, A. L. (2016). Making AI safe for humans: A conversation with Siri. In R. W. Gehl & M. Bakardjieva (Eds.), Socialbots and their friends: Digital media and the automation of sociality (pp.69-85). Routledge.
[41]
Guzman, A. L. (2018). Voices in and of the machine: Source orientation toward mobile virtual assistants. Computers in Human Behavior, 90, 343-350.
[42]
Guzman, A. L., & Lewis, S. C. (2019). Artificial intelligence and communication: A human-machine communication research agenda. New Media & Society, 22(1), 70-86.
Artificial intelligence (AI) and people’s interactions with it—through virtual agents, socialbots, and language-generation software—do not fit neatly into paradigms of communication theory that have long focused on human–human communication. To address this disconnect between communication theory and emerging technology, this article provides a starting point for articulating the differences between communicative AI and previous technologies and introduces a theoretical basis for navigating these conditions in the form of scholarship within human–machine communication (HMC). Drawing on an HMC framework, we outline a research agenda built around three key aspects of communicative AI technologies: (1) the functional dimensions through which people make sense of these devices and applications as communicators, (2) the relational dynamics through which people associate with these technologies and, in turn, relate to themselves and others, and (3) the metaphysical implications called up by blurring ontological boundaries surrounding what constitutes human, machine, and communication.
[43]
Hadler, F. (2018). Editorial-Beyond UX. Interface Critique, (1), 2-9.
[44]
Hardy, C., & Thomas, R. (2015). Discourse in a material world. Journal of Management Studies, 52(5), 680-696.
[45]
Hookway, B. (2014). Interface. MIT Press.
[46]
Humphry, J., & Chesher, C. (2021). Preparing for smart voice assistants: Cultural histories and media innovations. New Media & Society, 23(7), 1971-1988.
Smart voice assistants have become popular thanks largely to their default naturalistic female voices and helpful personae. In this article, we trace changes in robot voices in popular culture and explain how this history influenced the voice design of smart voice assistants. Our research draws on cultural analysis of Hollywood and international films, television and literature, and observations from our personal experiences with voice assistants. We argue that designers of devices like the Google Home and Amazon Echo inherited a cultural imaginary of alien and dangerous robots with artificial voices and personalities. Manufacturers leveraged techniques of modality, personae and invocation and pre-existing social connotations of the voice to create positive associations of these devices in the home. We conclude by arguing that smart voice assistants are new media innovations prepared for consumers through pre-domestication and represent an emerging regime of power and influence based on technologised voice interaction.
[47]
Levy-Landesberg, H. (2021). Listen up! Phatic thresholds and sound interface design. New Media & Society, 23(10), 3084-3104.
This article points to the long-standing and significant role that the sound interface plays in shaping the ways we attend to media by considering its phatic function. Employing a reverse engineering approach, the article consists of an analysis of historical transformations in the regimen of attention produced by sound media to date, followed by discourse analyses of scientific and industry communities of digital sound interface design. Introducing the term “phatic alignment” to describe how media and humans are arranged in space and adjusted to communicate with one another, this article points to the increasing hold of the digital sound interface over the user’s attention and identifies the premises affording this trend. The article argues that in abstracting the human ear as an automated “phatic threshold” that regulates the user’s attention, digital sound interface design situates the user in constant attentiveness to media and sets the stage for next-generation communication technologies.
[48]
Lipp, B., & Dickel, S. (2023). Interfacing the human/machine. Distinktion: Journal of Social Theory, 24(3), 425-443.
[49]
Lipp, B., Helm, P., Karafillidis, A., & Pujadas, R. (2025). De-centring the interface. Towards the integrated study of interfacial relations. Information, Communication & Society, 28(8), 1463-1479.
[50]
Mackenzie, A. (2006). Cutting code: Software and sociality (Vol. 30). Peter Lang.
[51]
Nake, F. (2019). Human-machine interface (1984). Interface Critique, (2), 35-45.
[52]
Napolitano, D. (2023). The shaping of a standard voice: Sonic and sociotechnical imaginaries in smart speakers. Im@go. A Journal of the Social Imaginary, 21, 177-196.
[53]
Ong, W. J. (2012). Orality and literacy: The technologizing of the word. Routledge.
[54]
Peres, S. C., Best, V., Brock, D., Shinn-Cunningham, B., Frauenberger, C., Hermann, T., Neuhoff, J. G., Nickerson, L. V., & Stockman, T. (2008). Auditory interfaces. In P. Kortum (Ed.), HCI beyond the GUI: Design for haptic, speech, olfactory, and other nontraditional interfaces (pp.147-195). Elsevier.
[55]
Ploeger, D. (2019). Imagining the seamless cyborg:Computer system sounds as embodying technologies. In M. Grimshaw-Aagaard, M. Walther-Hansen, & M. Knakkergaard (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of sound and imagination (Vol. 2) (pp. 579-594). Oxford University Press.
[56]
Porcheron, M., Fischer, J. E., Reeves, S., & Sharples, S. (2018, April 21-26). Voice interfaces in everyday life [Paper presentation]. Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Montreal, Canada.
[57]
Ramati, I. (2024). Algorithmic ventriloquism: The contested state of voice in AI speech generators. Social Media + Society, (1), 20563051231224401.
[58]
Rosenthal-von der Pütten, A., & Koban, K. (2023). Interpersonal interactions between people and machines. In A. L. Guzman, R. McEwen, & S. Jones (Eds.), The Sage handbook of human-machine communication (pp.294-301). Sage Publications Ltd.
[59]
Schulz-Schaeffer, I. (2021). Affordance, role, and script as complementary concepts of artefact-user interaction, illustrated by the example of an egg separator. Science & Technology Studies, 34(4), 74-93.
[60]
Seaborn, K., Miyake, N. P., Pennefather, P., & Otake-Matsuura, M. (2021). Voice in human-agent interaction: A survey. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), 54(4), 1-43.
[61]
Soffer, O. (2010). “Silent orality”: Toward a conceptualization of the digital oral features in CMC and SMS texts. Communication Theory, 20(4), 387-404.
[62]
Soffer, O. (2019). From textual orality to oral textuality: The case of voice queries. Convergence, 26(4), 927-941.
This study analyzes the phenomenon of digital voice search queries against the background of the fluid and changing balance in the orality–literacy osmosis of different historical eras. In attempting to theoretically conceptualize the unique oral characteristics of this new digital feature, this article argues that as the result of technological considerations, voice querying manifests an attempt to discipline oral words – to pronounce them while thinking of their written form. The article also considers the oxymoron of ‘looking up’ information through spoken words; the effect of an interface that stresses the use of the oral words as an event; the devocalization of queries, as they transform into a written form; and the implications of browsing the Internet through oral word searches, especially for young children. It concludes that the integration of these oral features can be explained by the affordances of digital media on the one hand and the ‘revival’ of intuitive preprint features attempting to ease the cognitive demands of print culture on the other hand.
[63]
Stanfill, M. (2015). The interface as discourse: The production of norms through web design. New Media & Society, 17(7), 1059-1074.
This article elaborates a theoretical case for considering new media as productive power, viewing web interfaces as both reflecting and reinforcing social logics. It then details an analytic method for websites – discursive interface analysis – which examines functionalities, menu options, and page layouts for the structures at work within them. The piece concludes with a short, illustrative examination of several official media company websites, articulating the productive constraints of their interfaces and the norms that they construct. Ultimately, the essay offers a tool for the new media research kit to improve our understanding of how norms for technologies and their users are produced and with what implications.
[64]
Sterne, J. (2012). MP3:The Meaning of a Format. Duke University Press.
[65]
Truax, B. (1984). Acoustic communication. Ablex Publishing Corporation.
[66]
Voegelin, S. (2019). Sonic materialism:Hearing the Arche-Sonic. In M. Grimshaw-Aagaard, M. Walther-Hansen, & M. Knakkergaard (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of sound and imagination (Vol. 2) (pp.559-578). Oxford University Press.
[67]
Xu, S., & Li, W. (2024). A tool or a social being? A dynamic longitudinal investigation of functional use and relational use of AI voice assistants. New Media & Society, 26(7), 3912-3930.

Footnotes

1. 主要参考中国移动互联网商业智能服务商QuestMobile于2025年9月最新发布的《2025年8月AI应用行业月度报告》,参见 https://www.questmobile.com.cn/research/report/1967853261412208641

2. 经两位研究者的多轮检索发现,这五个关键词能覆盖2018年以来与手机语音助手声音相关的所有内容,包括声音的唤醒词、音色特质、表达风格、控制方式、操作步骤。

3. 涵盖产品抽奖结果公示、虽提及关键词但内容与人机交互无关,以及以维护社群为目的的信息。

4. 产品官网涵盖语音助手功能、特性、操作方式等内容。OPPO超级小布助手: https://www.coloros.com/service/instruction/coloros15/DTO001697.html;小米超级小爱: https://xiaoai.mi.com/;华为小艺: https://consumer.huawei.com/cn/mobileservices/celia/

5. 开放平台通过提供语音识别、自然语言处理、语音合成等核心技术辅助,为手机语音助手接入其它APP、降低语音交互门槛、搭建场景化智慧市场提供服务。OPPO开放平台: https://open.oppomobile.com/;小米小爱同学开放平台: https://developers.xiaoai.mi.com/;华为小艺开放平台: https://developer.huawei.com/consumer/cn/celia/

6. 源于小米小爱开放平台: https://developers.xiaoai.mi.com/

Funding

National Social Science Fund Major Special Project “Research on Deepening the Reform of Cyberspace Governance Systems and Improving the Comprehensive Cyber Governance System”(24ZDA081)
PDF(1674 KB)

Accesses

Citation

Detail

Sections
Recommended

/