Kristen Shinohara

In the shadow of misperception: assistive technology use and social interactions

Few research studies focus on how the use of assistive technologies is affected by social interaction among people. We present an interview study of 20 individuals to determine how assistive technology use is affected by social and professional contexts and interactions. We found that specific assistive devices sometimes marked their users as having disabilities; that functional access took priority over feeling self-conscious when using assistive technologies; and that two misperceptions pervaded assistive technology use: (1) that assistive devices could functionally eliminate a disability, and (2) that people with disabilities would be helpless without their devices. Our findings provide further evidence that accessibility should be built into mainstream technologies. When this is not feasible, assistive devices should incorporate cutting edge technologies and strive to be designed for social acceptability, a new design approach we propose here.

Enhanced area cursors: reducing fine pointing demands for people with motor impairments

Computer users with motor impairments face major challenges with conventional mouse pointing. These challenges are mostly due to fine pointing corrections at the final stages of target acquisition. To reduce the need for correction-phase pointing and to lessen the effects of small target size on acquisition difficulty, we introduce four enhanced area cursors, two of which rely on magnification and two of which use goal crossing. In a study with motor-impaired and able-bodied users, we compared the new designs to the point and Bubble cursors, the latter of which had not been evaluated for users with motor impairments. Two enhanced area cursors, the Visual-Motor-Magnifier and Click-and-Cross, were the most successful new designs for users with motor impairments, reducing selection time for small targets by 19%, corrective submovements by 45%, and error rate by up to 82% compared to the point cursor. Although the Bubble cursor also improved performance, participants with motor impairments unanimously preferred the enhanced area cursors.

A blind person's interactions with technology

Meaning can be as important as usability in the design of technology.

Self-Conscious or Self-Confident? A Diary Study Conceptualizing the Social Accessibility of Assistive Technology

With the recent influx of smartphones, tablets, and wearables such as watches and glasses, personal interactive device use is increasingly visible and commonplace in public and social spaces. Assistive Technologies (ATs) used by people with disabilities are observable to others and, as a result, can affect how AT users are perceived. This raises the possibility that what we call “social accessibility” may be as important as “functional accessibility” when considering ATs. But, to date, ATs have almost exclusively been regarded as functional aids. For example, ATs are defined by the Technical Assistance to the States Act as technologies that are “used to increase, maintain or improve functional capabilities of individuals with disabilities.” To investigate perceptions and self-perceptions of AT users, we conducted a diary study of two groups of participants: people with disabilities and people without disabilities. Our goal was to explore the types of interactions and perceptions that arise around AT use in social and public spaces. During our 4-week study, participants with sensory disabilities wrote about feeling either self-conscious or self-confident when using an assistive device in a social or public situation. Meanwhile, participants without disabilities were prompted to record their reactions and feelings whenever they saw ATs used in social or public situations. We found that AT form and function does influence social interactions by impacting self-efficacy and self-confidence. When the design of form or function is poor, or when inequality between technological accessibility exists, social inclusion is negatively affected, as are perceptions of ability. We contribute a definition for the “social accessibility” of ATs and subsequently offer Design for Social Accessibility (DSA) as a holistic design stance focused on balancing an AT users sociotechnical identity with functional requirements.

Designing assistive technology for blind users

This project reports on an observational and interview study of a non-sighted person to develop design insights for enhancing interactions between a blind person and everyday technological artifacts found in their home such as wristwatches, cell phones or software applications. Analyzing situations where work-arounds compensate for task failures reveals important insights for future artifact design for the blind such as the value of socialization, tactile and audio feedback, and facilitation of user independence.

A new approach for the design of assistive technologies: design for social acceptance

While assistive technology focuses on providing function to help people with disabilities overcome barriers to access, awkward and clunky designs often draw unwanted attention to the user. In this way, assistive technologies are not always designed with social situations in mind, and may contribute to issues of in-access, particularly in social situations. I am defining and developing a new approach, Design for Social Acceptance, to incorporate social acceptance into the design of assistive technology. The goal of my research is to make assistive technologies more socially acceptable to alleviate social misperceptions of assistive technologies and people with disabilities through improved design processes. I will conduct this work by (1) defining what design elements make up socially acceptable designs, and (2) by adapting and developing design techniques to incorporate social acceptance into the design process for assistive technologies. Thus far, I have conducted studies exploring how people with disabilities feel about using their technologies in social and professional contexts to gain an understanding of the socio-technical relations arising around assistive technologies.

Investigating meaning in uses of assistive devices: implications of social and professional contexts

People with disabilities use assistive devices both to bridge accessibility gaps in everyday tasks, and to augment inaccessible technologies, such as desktop computers. This interview study investigates how people with disabilities are affected when using assistive devices in professional and social situations. Participants were asked about different contexts of use, and how people around them reacted to their devices. Key findings were that individuals experienced issues of self consciousness and empowerment when using assistive devices and that specific aspects of assistive device design, such as size and perceived sleekness, contributed to these feelings.

Using a Design Workshop To Explore Accessible Ideation

Although a critical step in the technology design process, ideation is often not accessible for people with disabilities. We present findings from a design workshop facilitated to brainstorm accessible ideation methods. Groups, mostly engineers, ideated on a design challenge and documented access barriers encountered by participants with disabilities. They then ideated and prototyped potential solutions for decreasing access barriers. We offer suggestions for more accessible communication and ideation on a design team and insights from using a workshop as a site for rethinking ideation.

Tenets for Social Accessibility: Towards Humanizing Disabled People in Design

Despite years of addressing disability in technology design and advocating user-centered design practices, popular mainstream technologies remain largely inaccessible for people with disabilities. We conducted a design course study investigating how student designers regard disability and explored how designing for multiple disabled and nondisabled users encouraged students to think about accessibility in the design process. Across two university course offerings one year apart, we examined how students focused on a design project while learning user-centered design concepts and techniques, working with people with and without disabilities throughout the project. In addition, we compared how students incorporated disability-focused design approaches within a classroom setting. We found that designing for multiple stakeholders with and without disabilities expanded student understanding of accessible design by demonstrating that people with the same disability could have diverse needs and by aligning such needs with those of nondisabled users. We also found that using approaches targeted toward designing for people with disabilities complemented interactions with users, particularly with regard to managing varying abilities across users, or incorporating social aspects. Our findings contribute to an understanding about how we might incur change in design practice by working with multiple stakeholders with and without disabilities whenever possible. We refined Design for Social Accessibility by incorporating these findings into three tenets emphasizing: (1) design for disability ought to incorporate users with and without disabilities, (2) design should address functional and social factors simultaneously, and (3) design should include tools to spur consideration of social factors in accessible design.

Who Teaches Accessibility?: A Survey of U.S. Computing Faculty

Industry demand for software developers with knowledge of accessibility has increased substantially in recent years. However, there is little knowledge about the prevalence of higher education teaching about accessibility or facultys perceived barriers to teaching accessibility. To address this gap, we surveyed 14,176 computing and information science faculty in the United States. We received a representative sample of at least one response from 318 of the 352 institutions we surveyed, totaling 1,857 responses. We found that 175 institutions (50%) had at least one instructor teaching accessibility and that no fewer than 2.5% of faculty overall teach accessibility. Faculty that teach accessibility are twice as likely to be female, to have expertise in HCI and software engineering, and to know people with disabilities. The most critical barriers to teaching accessibility that faculty reported were the absence of clear and discipline-specific accessibility learning objectives and the lack of faculty knowledge about accessibility. Faculty desired resources that were specific to the areas of computing in which they teach rather than general accessibility resources and guidelines.