The AT Effect: How Disability Affects the Perceived Social Acceptability of Head-Mounted Display Use

Wearable computing devices offer new possibilities to increase accessibility and independence for individuals with disabilities. However, the adoption of such devices may be influenced by social factors, and useful devices may not be adopted if they are considered inappropriate to use. While public policy may adapt to support accommodations for assistive technology, emerging technologies may be unfamiliar or unaccepted by bystanders. We surveyed 1200 individuals about the use of a head-mounted display in a public setting, examining how information about the user's disability affected judgments of the social acceptability of the scenario. Our findings reveal that observers considered head-mounted display use more socially acceptable if the device was being used to support a person with a disability.

[1]  Lynette A Hart (Geyer),et al.  Social acknowledegments for children with disabilities: effects of service dogs. , 1989, Child development.

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

[3]  Patrick Carrington,et al.  Wearables and chairables: inclusive design of mobile input and output techniques for power wheelchair users , 2014, CHI.

[4]  Nadir Weibel,et al.  Chroma: a wearable augmented-reality solution for color blindness , 2014, UbiComp.

[5]  Leah Findlater,et al.  Personalized, Wearable Control of a Head-mounted Display for Users with Upper Body Motor Impairments , 2015, CHI.

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

[7]  Ellen Yi-Luen Do,et al.  Don't mind me touching my wrist: a case study of interacting with on-body technology in public , 2013, ISWC '13.

[8]  Jon Froehlich,et al.  Head-Mounted Display Visualizations to Support Sound Awareness for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing , 2015, CHI.

[9]  Uran Oh,et al.  Current and future mobile and wearable device use by people with visual impairments , 2014, CHI.

[10]  Jan O. Borchers,et al.  Pinstripe: eyes-free continuous input on interactive clothing , 2011, CHI.

[11]  Niels Henze,et al.  Wearable computing for older adults: initial insights into head-mounted display usage , 2014, UbiComp Adjunct.

[12]  Leah Findlater,et al.  Designing Conversation Cues on a Head-Worn Display to Support Persons with Aphasia , 2015, CHI.

[13]  Uran Oh,et al.  Design of and subjective response to on-body input for people with visual impairments , 2014, ASSETS.

[14]  Tadayoshi Kohno,et al.  In situ with bystanders of augmented reality glasses: perspectives on recording and privacy-mediating technologies , 2014, CHI.

[15]  Abigail Sellen,et al.  Do life-logging technologies support memory for the past?: an experimental study using sensecam , 2007, CHI.

[16]  N. Hoffart.  Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory , 2000 .

[17]  Lucy E. Dunne,et al.  The social comfort of wearable technology and gestural interaction , 2014, 2014 36th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[18]  H. Steel,et al.  The experience of owning a guide dog , 2008, Disability and rehabilitation.

[19]  M. Scherer,et al.  Assistive Technology Use and Stigma , 2004 .

[20]  Jacob Cohen.  A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales , 1960 .

[21]  Patrick Olivier,et al.  Exploring the acceptability of google glass as an everyday assistive device for people with parkinson's , 2014, CHI.

[22]  Bruce H. Thomas,et al.  Social weight: designing to minimise the social consequences arising from technology use by the mobile professional , 2003, Personal and Ubiquitous Computing.

[23]  Reuben Kirkham.  Exploring the overlap between wearable computing and disability discrimination law , 2015, BCS HCI.

[24]  Paul T. Jaeger.  Disability, human rights, and social justice: The ongoing struggle for online accessibility and equality , 2015, First Monday.

[25]  Stephen A. Brewster,et al.  Usable gestures for mobile interfaces: evaluating social acceptability , 2010, CHI.

[26]  Anselm L. Strauss,et al.  Basics of qualitative research : techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory , 1998 .

[27]  Katherine Deibel,et al.  A convenient heuristic model for understanding assistive technology adoption , 2013, ASSETS.

[28]  Catherine Kudlick.  Black Bike, White Cane: Nonstandard Deviations of a Special Self , 2011 .

[29]  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.

[30]  O. J. Dunn.  Multiple Comparisons among Means , 1961 .

[31]  Stephen A. Brewster,et al.  Gestures all around us: user differences in social acceptability perceptions of gesture based interfaces , 2009, Mobile HCI.