AI vs. Manual Transcription: Future of Transcription & the Clear Winner

Busines Artificial Intelligence

Online transformation is not helping with less-skilled jobs. Currently, businesses need to embrace to remain competitive and relevant. The convenience of new technologies, including artificial business intelligence, can be explained when considering today’s transcriptionists’ responsibilities.

Lately, our dependence on AI or business artificial intelligence has increased manifold. Machines are frequently replacing human transcribers. But can a machine ever be a match or exceed a human touch?

With automatic transcription software now available, those who require transcripts must now choose between AI vs. Manual. It can help identify your exact requirements, limitations, and the volume of work you’re facing with an abundance of transcription tools available.

The dependence on speech recognition technology is massive, and the error rates are even more significant, making the transcripts delivered useless. As per research, while analyzing AI vs. Manual, human transcriptionists had an error rate of nearly 4% while commercial ASR transcription software’s error rate was found to be almost 12%.

Machines or softwares are neither regulated and intelligent enough nor able to pick up the human language’s differences. Accents, tones, popular terms, and idioms, automated transcription software can never understand and gauge effectively as a human transcriptionist can do.

Here is why we still require human transcription services for an error-free transcript, and we’ll explain why human is the winner in this AI vs. Manual battle.

A better Understanding of Accents and Dialects

A professional transcriptionist is much more experienced than any superior software or machine. A human transcriptionist can adjust to any accent or dialect. Even if an accent or dialect is unfamiliar, an audio transcription provider can explore and come to an accurate conclusion.

In contrast, a machine or business artificial intelligence is incapable of this. Translation machines are not advanced enough to entirely grasp different accents or dialects. From mistranslating words to terminologies, speech-to-text recognition technology can confuse things that might be beyond our understanding. Hence, the winner in this segment of AI vs. Manual battle is, of course, humans.

Eliminate Gossiping, fillers and other background sounds

Speech recognition technology is not up to human transcription level when it comes to differentiating between a comma, semi-colon, and other punctuation marks. Speech-to-text technology employs the verbatim transcription; it catches all spoken words, and even fillers such as “oh,” “ah,” “uh,” and “umm.”

It also picks up unfinished sentences heading to confusing and vague transcripts. Here professional transcription services come in handy against the artificial business intelligence, promising smart, edited transcripts completed by a human transcriptionist. The winner of this segment is again humans.

Knowledge of industry-specific jargon

For a complete document transcription, it is suggested to hire a transcriptionist with in-depth knowledge of a specific topic. Human transcriptionists are preferred over business artificial intelligence for pharmaceutical companies or technical-specific content. An AI-powered transcription software would not be skillful enough to grasp homophones.

For instance, a legal transcriptionist will be habituated with the legal jargon. Therefore, only experienced business transcription services will be capable of doing justice and bring in value to technical or business-related content transcripts. Hence, the winner of AI vs. Manual again is human.

Fact Check and bring Clarity

There might be several situations when the speaker in the audio or video file might say something out of the topic, or the recording may be unclear. A human transcriber can check for facts, do research, join all the missing pieces, and make sense of the missing sentences.

With some clarity and knowledge on the topic, an experienced transcriptionist can accumulate what is being said and come up with an accurate transcript. Whereas, your automated software cannot verify facts or try to gain prominence on the topic. In worst cases, the business intelligence software might discard the audio or video file. The winner for AI vs. Manualbattle again is human.

Recognize Redundant Content and Number of Speakers

While going through a business meeting, recording, interview, or an audio clip,AI transcription software cannot identify the number of speakers and end up giving a transcript that can be complicated to the reader. At the same time, a human transcriptionist is capable of differentiating one speaker with another.

Human transcribers can play the recording multiple times, pick the best from the mixed content, and remove unnecessary talks, fillers, and jargon. Only a human can add meaning to the content, resulting in an error-free well-edited transcript. Again the winner of the AI vs. Manualbattle will be humans.

Has the Machine taken over Human Intelligence?

Transcriptionists must consider embracing these business artificial intelligence technologies and defining their roles as critical in managing transcription software as it is released and updated. Humans and technology’s combined effort will provide societies, businesses, and individuals involved with the peace of mind. AI technology might have taken the lead in various spheres of our lives, but a human touch is still required.

To conclude this article on AI vs. Manual, we can safely say that humans are the winner when it comes to transcription services.

  • 1573 Views
  • 897 3

All Comments

  • Gordon Cotman

    Human recognition is clearly the better choice. Although Google speech is very helpful in reduction of time to complete longer messages, it has problems with punctuation, capitalization and sometimes spelling, the time it takes for those corrections can still save a great deal of time vs. typing.

    9 months ago | 21 September, 2020 12:37 am Reply
  • Sam Cordero

    AI transcribers, as well as translators, are increasingly undoubtedly becoming essential “tools” for many businesses in today’s global economy. Nevertheless, they are only that “a tool”. The need for that special understanding that (at least for now) can only be provided by the human mind will not easily be replaced.

    As a user of both AI transcribers and online translators such as Google Translate, I have recognized firsthand the lacking human cognizance both systems demonstrate. With the English to the Spanish language, for instance, this is immediately noticeable in the failure to distinguish between male and female, as well as formalities (e.g., “Tú”-commonly used when addressing young or contemporary people and “Usted”-when addressing older people or as respectful recognition in the case of certain public figures).

    The use of AI transcribers and translators for Asian languages (in my experience from English to Japanese), is a whole new story. Unlike English to Spanish, transcribing and/or translating from English to Japanese using AI requires a much higher “human” attention to proofreading. Grammar structure being the greatest concern – Unlike with Spanish where the grammar is very similar to that of the English language (with exceptions as previously noted) Japanese grammar one could say is opposite that of English grammar. A clear example of that is the use of the verb; In Japanese, it is “always” found at the end of a sentence.

    I quote you; “To conclude this article on AI vs. Manual, we can safely say that humans are the winner when it comes to transcription services.” I may add that this applies to (online) translators as well.

    “Viva The Human Race!”

    10 months ago | 31 August, 2020 9:34 pm Reply
  • Ty Young

    Very interesting,thank you for the information.

    10 months ago | 31 August, 2020 1:57 pm Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *