Embracing Errors: Examining How Context of Use Impacts Blind Individuals' Acceptance of Navigation Aid Errors

Prevention of errors has been an orienting goal within the field of Human-Computer Interaction since its inception, with particular focus on minimizing human errors through appropriate technology design. However, there has been relatively little exploration into how designers can best support users of technologies that will inevitably make errors. We present a mixed-methods study in the domain of navigation technology for visually impaired individuals. We examined how users respond to device errors made in realistic scenarios of use. Contrary to conventional wisdom that usable systems must be error-free, we found that 42% of errors were acceptable to users. Acceptance of errors depends on error type, building feature, and environmental context. Further, even when a technical error is acceptable to the user, the misguided social responses of others nearby can negatively impact user experience. We conclude with design recommendations that embrace errors while also supporting user management of errors in technical systems.

[1]  Alessandro Mecocci,et al.  Outdoor scenes interpretation suitable for blind people navigation , 1995 .

[2]  Kristen Shinohara,et al.  Observing Sara: a case study of a blind person's interactions with technology , 2007, Assets '07.

[3]  Amy Hurst,et al.  "just let the cane hit it": how the blind and sighted see navigation differently , 2014, ASSETS.

[4]  Richard E. Ladner,et al.  Freedom to roam: a study of mobile device adoption and accessibility for people with visual and motor disabilities , 2009, Assets '09.

[5]  Roberta L. Klatzky,et al.  Personal guidance system for the visually impaired , 1994, ASSETS.

[6]  Kostas E. Bekris,et al.  The user as a sensor: navigating users with visual impairments in indoor spaces using tactile landmarks , 2012, CHI.

[7]  Nicholas A. Giudice,et al.  Indoor inertial waypoint navigation for the blind , 2013, 2013 35th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC).

[8]  Kristen Shinohara,et al.  Investigating meaning in uses of assistive devices: implications of social and professional contexts , 2010, ASSETS '10.

[9]  Amy Hurst,et al.  "Pray before you step out": describing personal and situational blind navigation behaviors , 2013, ASSETS.

[10]  Halley Profita,et al.  The AT Effect: How Disability Affects the Perceived Social Acceptability of Head-Mounted Display Use , 2016, CHI.

[11]  Shaun K. Kane,et al.  Collaborative Accessibility: How Blind and Sighted Companions Co-Create Accessible Home Spaces , 2015, CHI.

[12]  Roberta L. Klatzky,et al.  Navigation System for the Blind: Auditory Display Modes and Guidance , 1998, Presence.

[13]  Darling Nc,et al.  A preliminary followup study of electronic travel aid users. , 1977 .

[14]  Gert Jan Gelderblom,et al.  Inventory of Electronic Mobility Aids for Persons with Visual Impairments: A Literature Review , 2008 .

[15]  G L Goodrich,et al.  A preliminary followup study of electronic travel aid users. , 1977, Bulletin of prosthetics research.

[16]  Jacob O. Wobbrock,et al.  In the shadow of misperception: assistive technology use and social interactions , 2011, CHI.

[17]  Hironobu Takagi,et al.  Exploring Interface Design for Independent Navigation by People with Visual Impairments , 2015, ASSETS.

[18]  Abdelsalam Helal,et al.  Drishti: an integrated indoor/outdoor blind navigation system and service , 2004, Second IEEE Annual Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications, 2004. Proceedings of the.

[19]  Amy Hurst,et al.  Let's Get Lost: Exploring Social Norms In Predominately Blind Environments , 2016, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[20]  Jacob O. Wobbrock,et al.  Self-Conscious or Self-Confident? A Diary Study Conceptualizing the Social Accessibility of Assistive Technology , 2016, ACM Trans. Access. Comput..

[21]  Eelke Folmer,et al.  Headlock: a wearable navigation aid that helps blind cane users traverse large open spaces , 2014, ASSETS.

[22]  Jeremy R. Cooperstock,et al.  Listen to it yourself!: evaluating usability of what's around me? for the blind , 2013, CHI.

[23]  Roberto Manduchi,et al.  The last meter: blind visual guidance to a target , 2014, CHI.

[24]  M. Bousbia-Salah,et al.  An Ultrasonic Navigation System for Blind People , 2007, 2007 IEEE International Conference on Signal Processing and Communications.

[25]  Shaun K. Kane,et al.  The Invisible Work of Accessibility: How Blind Employees Manage Accessibility in Mixed-Ability Workplaces , 2015, ASSETS.

[26]  John A. Brabyn,et al.  New Developments in Mobility and Orientation Aids for the Blind , 1982, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

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

[28]  Hironobu Takagi,et al.  NavCog: a navigational cognitive assistant for the blind , 2016, MobileHCI.

[29]  Rogerio DePaula,et al.  A Framework for the Adoption of Assistive Technology , 2002 .

[30]  Josh D. Tenenberg,et al.  A blind person's interactions with technology , 2009, Commun. ACM.

[31]  Hironobu Takagi,et al.  NavCog: turn-by-turn smartphone navigation assistant for people with visual impairments or blindness , 2016, W4A.

[32]  Chikamune Wada.  Basic Study on Presenting Distance Information to the Blind for Navigation , 2009, 2009 Fourth International Conference on Innovative Computing, Information and Control (ICICIC).

[33]  B Phillips,et al.  Predictors of assistive technology abandonment. , 1993, Assistive technology : the official journal of RESNA.

[34]  Paul Dourish,et al.  What we talk about when we talk about context , 2004, Personal and Ubiquitous Computing.

[35]  Amy Hurst,et al.  Not All Errors are Created Equal: Factors that Impact Acceptance of an Indoor Navigation Aid for the Blind , 2016, ASSETS.