Asymmetry in Usability Evaluation of the Assistive Technology among Users With and Without Disabilities

ABSTRACT In the area of human–computer interaction (HCI) of persons with disabilities (PWDs), the knowledge about the mechanisms determining their evaluation of the assistive technology is particularly important. This study is aimed at exploring the usability evaluation process of an assistive technology on the example of Face Controller (FC). To trace the evaluation process, a comparison of the FC usability evaluation between PWDs (N = 29) and persons with no disabilities (PNDs; N = 32) was performed. The present study revealed that the PWDs reported higher satisfaction and perceived usability of the FC comparing to the PNDs, whereas the effectiveness and efficiency were both lower for PWDs. This asymmetrical pattern of the results in the evaluation of the FC usability is discussed as an extension of disability paradox and can enhance the understanding of conceptualization and evaluation HCI made by PWDs.

[1]  R. C. Fouché,et al.  Head mouse: generalisability of research focused on the disabled to able bodied users , 2017, SAICSIT '17.

[2]  Anne Marsden,et al.  International Organization for Standardization , 2014 .

[3]  Sharanjit Uppal,et al.  Impact of the timing, type and severity of disability on the subjective well-being of individuals with disabilities. , 2006, Social science & medicine.

[4]  J. Olsen.  Socially disabled: the fight disabled people face against loneliness and stress , 2018 .

[5]  R. Amundson.  Quality of Life, Disability, and Hedonic Psychology , 2010 .

[6]  P. Rosenbaum,et al.  Development of the Gross Motor Function Classification System for cerebral palsy , 2008, Developmental medicine and child neurology.

[7]  James R. Lewis,et al.  The System Usability Scale: Past, Present, and Future , 2018, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[8]  James T. Miller,et al.  An Empirical Evaluation of the System Usability Scale , 2008, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[9]  Héctor A. Caltenco,et al.  Understanding Computer Users With Tetraplegia: Survey of Assistive Technology Users , 2012, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[10]  H Nazirah,et al.  THE APPLICATIONS OF INTERNATIONAL CLASSIFICATION OF FUNCTIONING, DISABILITY AND HEALTH (ICF) BY WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION(WHO) IN REHABILITATION MEDICINE PRACTICE , 2007 .

[11]  Zdenek Míkovec,et al.  Humsher: a predictive keyboard operated by humming , 2011, ASSETS.

[12]  Anxo Cereijo Roibás.  Understanding the Influence of the Users' Context in AmI , 2008 .

[13]  Paul T. Jaeger.  LIFELONG INTERACTIONSPersons with disabilities and intergenerational universal usability , 2009, INTR.

[14]  Rick Kjeldsen.  An On-Screen Keyboard for Users with Poor Pointer Control , 2007, HCI.

[15]  G. Stucki,et al.  Explaining the disability paradox: a cross-sectional analysis of the Swiss general population , 2012, BMC Public Health.

[16]  J. B. Brooke,et al.  SUS: a retrospective , 2013 .

[17]  N. Schwarz,et al.  Why are You Calling Me? How Study Introductions Change Response Patterns , 2006, Quality of Life Research.

[18]  D. Ehde,et al.  Psychosocial factors and adjustment to chronic pain in persons with physical disabilities: a systematic review. , 2011, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[19]  Tiago João Vieira Guerreiro,et al.  Usage of Subjective Scales in Accessibility Research , 2015, ASSETS.

[20]  S. Alper,et al.  Assistive Technology for Individuals with Disabilities: A Review and Synthesis of the Literature , 2006 .

[21]  Dylan M. Jones,et al.  Refining the measurement of mood: The UWIST Mood Adjective Checklist , 1990 .

[22]  E. Agree,et al.  The potential for technology to enhance independence for those aging with a disability. , 2014, Disability and health journal.

[23]  Vittorio Sanguineti,et al.  Adaptive training with full-body movements to reduce bradykinesia in persons with Parkinson’s disease: a pilot study , 2015, Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation.

[24]  H. Koenig.  Positive Emotions, Physical Disability, and Mortality in Older Adults , 2000, Journal of the American Geriatrics Society.

[25]  I. Eibl-Eibesfeldt,et al.  Mechanisms Linking Social Ties and Support to Physical and Mental Health , 2011, Journal of health and social behavior.

[26]  Hsieh-Ching Chen,et al.  Application of a novel integrated pointing device apparatus for children with cerebral palsy. , 2006, Chang Gung medical journal.

[27]  M. Wehmeyer.  The Oxford handbook of positive psychology and disability , 2013 .

[28]  Jan Gulliksen,et al.  Universal design, inclusive design, accessible design, design for all: different concepts—one goal? On the concept of accessibility—historical, methodological and philosophical aspects , 2014, Universal Access in the Information Society.

[29]  W. Horner-Johnson,et al.  Self-rated health and healthy days: examining the "disability paradox". , 2008, Disability and health journal.

[30]  Heidi Horstmann Koester,et al.  Research in computer access assessment and intervention. , 2010, Physical medicine and rehabilitation clinics of North America.

[31]  Isabel M. Gómez,et al.  Kinect as an access device for people with cerebral palsy: A preliminary study , 2017, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[32]  Steven L. Johnson,et al.  A P300-Based Brain–Computer Interface: Effects of Interface Type and Screen Size , 2010, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[33]  Pertti Saariluoma,et al.  Emotional Dimensions of User Experience: A User Psychological Analysis , 2014, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[34]  Mick P. Couper,et al.  Usability Evaluation of Computer-Assisted Survey Instruments , 2000 .

[35]  D. Dunn.  Teaching About Psychosocial Aspects of Disability , 2016 .

[36]  Barbara Leporini,et al.  Criteria for Usability of Accessible Web Sites , 2002, User Interfaces for All.

[37]  Jennifer Huang,et al.  A Multi-Method Approach to Assess Usability and Acceptability , 2009 .

[38]  I. Scott MacKenzie,et al.  Qanti: A Software Tool for Quick Ambiguous Non-standard Text Input , 2010, ICCHP.

[39]  P. Salkovskis,et al.  Understanding and predicting parental decisions about early childhood immunizations. , 2004, Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association.

[40]  Philip T. Kortum,et al.  Usability Ratings for Everyday Products Measured With the System Usability Scale , 2013, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[41]  Richard L. Hazlett,et al.  Measuring emotional valence to understand the user's experience of software , 2007, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[42]  Peter Robinson,et al.  The use of cursor measures for motion-impaired computer users , 2002, Universal Access in the Information Society.

[43]  Mary E Sesto,et al.  Performance and touch characteristics of disabled and non-disabled participants during a reciprocal tapping task using touch screen technology. , 2012, Applied ergonomics.

[44]  Pavel Slavík,et al.  Text input for motor-impaired people , 2015, Universal Access in the Information Society.

[45]  I. Scott MacKenzie,et al.  SAK: Scanning ambiguous keyboard for efficient one-key text entry , 2010, TCHI.

[46]  Norbert Schwarz,et al.  Misimagining the unimaginable: the disability paradox and health care decision making. , 2005, Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association.