skip to main content
10.1145/2750858.2807541acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesubicompConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Landmark identification with wearables for supporting spatial awareness by blind persons

Authors Info & Claims
Published:07 September 2015Publication History

ABSTRACT

This paper describes our research on feedback mechanisms of wearables for supporting indoor landmark identification in the context of blind pedestrians' mobility. It contributes with a promising alternative to audible patterns, which are consistently related to the 'masking phenomenon'. It also contributes with many lessons and insights that could benefit the designer of wearables for blind users. We started from an observational study followed by co-creation workshops with designers and potential users. The resulting prototypes were used in two Case Studies. The first study investigated the occurrence of 'masking', a problem caused by technology that affects negatively the sensorial perception of the wearer. The second study investigated the usefulness of the wearables for the identification of landmarks. The wearable succeeded in both tests for the particular context in which it was used.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

p63-ugulino.mp4

mp4

40.5 MB

References

  1. Daniel Aguerrevere. 2004. Portable 3D Sound / Sonar Navigation System for Blind Individuals. The 2nd LACCEI Int. Latin Amer. Caribbean Conf. Eng. Technol.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Trevor R. Agus, Simon J. Thorpe, Clara Suied, and Daniel Pressnitzer. 2010. Characteristics of human voice processing. Proceedings of 2010 IEEE International Symposium on Circuits and Systems, IEEE, 509--512. http://doi.org/10.1109/ISCAS.2010.5537589Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Sona Karentz Andrews. 1983. Spatial cognition through tactual maps. 1st Int. Symposium on Maps and Graphics for the Visually Handicapped, Association of American Geographers, 30--40.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Jonathan Arnowitz, Michael Arent, and Nevin Berger. 2010. Effective Prototyping for Software Makers. Elsevier. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Senem Kursun Bahadir, Vladan Koncar, and Fatma Kalaoglu. 2012. Wearable obstacle detection system fully integrated to textile structures for visually impaired people. Sensors and Actuators A: Physical 179, 297--311. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.sna.2012.02.027Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. R. Bailey. 2008. Design of comparative experiments. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Elizabeth M Ball. 2008. Electronic Travel Aids: An Assessment. In Assistive technology for visually impaired and blind people. Springer, London, 289--321.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. George Berkeley. 1922. A new theory of vision and other select philosophical writings.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. George. Berkeley. 1709. An essay towards a new theory of vision.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Johann Borenstein and I. Ulrich. 1997. The GuideCane-a computerized travel aid for the active guidance of blind pedestrians. Proceedings of International Conference on Robotics and Automation, IEEE, 1283--1288. http://doi.org/10.1109/ROBOT.1997.614314Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. J a Brabyn. 1982. New developments in mobility and orientation aids for the blind. IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering 29, 4, 285--9. http://doi.org/10.1109/TBME.1982.324945Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Michael Brambring. 1985. Mobility and orientation processes of the blind. In Electronic spatial sensing for the blind, D. H. (Nijhoff) Warren and E. R. (Nijhoff) Strelow (eds.). Nijhoff, Dordrecht, Netherlands, 493--508.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. William Cheselden. 1728. An Account of some Observations made by a young Gentleman, who was born blind, or lost his Sight so early, that he had no Remembrance of ever having seen, and was couch'd between 13 and 14 Years of Age. Philosophical Transactions 402, 447--450.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. David Clark-Carter. 1985. Factors Affecting Blind Mobility.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Florian Dramas, Bernard Oriola, Brian G. Katz, Simon J Thorpe, and Christophe Jouffrais. 2008. Designing an assistive device for the blind based on object localization and augmented auditory reality. Proceedings of the 10th international ACM SIGACCESS conference on Computers and accessibility - Assets '08, ACM Press, 263. http://doi.org/10.1145/1414471.1414529 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. René Farcy, Roger Leroux, Alain Jucha, Roland Damaschini, Colette Grégoire, and Aziz Zogaghi. 2006. Electronic Travel Aids and Electronic Orientation Aids for blind people: technical, rehabilitation and everyday life points of view. Conference & Workshop on Assistive Technologies for People with Vision & Hearing Impairments Technology for Inclusion, 12.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Janet F. Fletcher. 1980. Spatial Representation in Blind Children: Development Compared to Sighted Children. Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness 74, 10, 381--385.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Hugo Fuks, Heloisa Moura, Debora Cardador, Katia Vega, Wallace Ugulino, and Marcos Barbato. 2012. Collaborative Museums: an Approach to Co-Design. Proceedings of the ACM 2012 conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work - CSCW '12, ACM Press, 681--684. http://doi.org/10.1145/2145204.2145307 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Sven Gehring. 2008. Adaptive Indoor Navigation for the Blind. GI Jahrestagung 1, 8, 293--294.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. J. L. Gonzalez-Mora, A. Rodriguez-Hernandez, L. F. Rodriguez-Ramos, L. Díaz-Saco, and N. Sosa. 1999. Development of a new space perception system for blind people, based on the creation of a virtual acoustic space. In Engineering Applications of Bio-Inspired Artificial Neural Networks, José Mira and Juan V. Sánchez-Andrés (eds.). Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 321--330. http://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0100499Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Hermann von Helmholtz. 1925. Handbook of physiological optics.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. M. A. Hersh and M. A Johnson. 2008. Mobility: An Overview. In Assistive technology for visually impaired and blind people. Springer, London, 167--208.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Marion A.; Hersh and Michael A Johnson. 2008. Disability and Assistive Technology Systems. In Assistive technology for visually impaired and blind people. 1--50.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Brian Hoyle and Dean Waters. 2008. Mobility AT: The Batcane (UltraCane ). In Assistive technology for visually impaired and blind peoples. Springer, London, 289--321.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Andreas Hub, Joachim Diepstraten, and Thomas Ertl. 2004. Design and development of an indoor navigation and object identification system for the blind. Proceedings of the ACM SIGACCESS conference on Computers and accessibility - ASSETS '04, ACM Press, 147. http://doi.org/10.1145/1028630.1028657 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Andreas Hub, Tim Hartter, and Thomas Ertl. 2006. Interactive tracking of movable objects for the blind on the basis of environment models and perception-oriented object recognition methods. Proceedings of the 8th international ACM SIGACCESS conference on Computers and accessibility - Assets '06, ACM Press, 111. http://doi.org/10.1145/1168987.1169007 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. T. Ifukube, T. Sasaki, and C. Peng. 1991. A blind mobility aid modeled after echolocation of bats. IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering 38, 5, 461--5. http://doi.org/10.1109/10.81565Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Kiyohide Ito, Makoto Okamoto, Junichi Akita, et al. 2005. CyARM: an alternative aid device for blind persons. CHI '05 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems - CHI '05, ACM Press, 1483. http://doi.org/10.1145/1056808.1056947 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Christophe Jacquet, Yacine Bellik, and Yolaine Bourda. 2006. Electronic Locomotion Aids for the Blind: Towards More Assistive Systems. Springer-Verlag, Berlin/Heidelberg. http://doi.org/10.1007/11418337Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. L. Kay. 1974. A sonar aid to enhance spatial perception of the blind: engineering design and evaluation. Radio and Electronic Engineer 44, 11, 605. http://doi.org/10.1049/ree.1974.0148Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. Leslie Kay. 1964. An Ultrasonic Sensing Probe as a Mobility Aid for the Blind. Ultrasonics 2, 2, 53--59.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. John Locke. 1975. An Essay Concerning Humane Understanding. Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. J. M. Loomis, R. L. Klatzky, R. G. Golledge, J. G. Cicinelli, J. W. Pellegrino, and P. A. Fry. 1993. Nonvisual navigation by blind and sighted: assessment of path integration ability. Journal of Experimental Psychology 122, 1, 73--91.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. Marina de Andrade Marconi and Eva Maria Lakatos. 2010. Fundamentos de Metodologia Científica. Atlas.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Simon Meers and Koren Ward. 2005. A Substitute Vision System for Providing 3D Perception and GPS Navigation via Electro-Tactile Stimulation. International Conference on Sensing Technology, November, 551--556.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. P B Meijer. 1992. An experimental system for auditory image representations. IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering 39, 2, 112--21. http://doi.org/10.1109/10.121642Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. S. Millar. 1995. Understanding and representing spatial information. British Journal of Visual Impairment 13, 1, 8--11. http://doi.org/10.1177/026461969501300102Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. Susanna Millar. 1994. Understanding and representing space: Theory and evidence from studies with blind and sighted children. Clarendon Press/Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. David M. Nathan. 1993. Long-term complications of diabetes mellitus. New England Journal of Medicine 328, 23, 1676--1685.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  40. Ana Maria Nicolaci-da-Costa. 2007. O campo da pesquisa qualitativa e o Método de Explicitação do Discurso Subjacente (MEDS). Psicologia: Reflexão e Crítica 20, 1, 65--73. http://doi.org/10.1590/S0102-79722007000100009Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Sa Panëels and Adriana Olmos. 2013. Listen to it yourself!: Evaluating Usability of "What's Around Me?" for the blind. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI '13, 2107--2116. http://doi.org/10.1145/2470654.2481290 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Lisa Ran, Sumi Helal, and Steve Moore. 2004. Drishti: An integrated indoor/outdoor blind navigation system and service. Proceedings - Second IEEE Annual Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications, PerCom, 23--30. http://doi.org/10.1109/PERCOM.2004.1276842 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  43. Jennifer Warnick (Microsoft Research). 2014. Independence Day. Retrieved May 31, 2015 from http://news.microsoft.com/stories/independence-day/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. G. Sainarayanan, R. Nagarajan, and Sazali Yaacob. 2007. Fuzzy image processing scheme for autonomous navigation of human blind. Applied Soft Computing Journal 7, 1, 257--264. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2005.06.005 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. S. Shoval, J. Borenstein, and Y. Koren. 1994. Mobile robot obstacle avoidance in a computerized travel aid for the blind. Proceedings of the 1994 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, IEEE Comput. Soc. Press, 2023--2028. http://doi.org/10.1109/ROBOT.1994.351166Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. Wallace C. Ugulino and Hugo Fuks. 2015. Prototyping Wearables for Supporting Cognitive Mapping by the Blind. Proceedings of the 2015 workshop on Wearable Systems and Applications - WearSys '15, 39--44. http://doi.org/10.1145/2753509.2753515 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. S. Ungar, M. Blades, and C. Spencer. 1995. Visually impaired children's strategies for memorising a map. British Journal of Visual Impairment 13, 1, 27--32. http://doi.org/10.1177/026461969501300107Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  48. Simon Ungar and Mark Blades. 1997. Strategies for Organising Information While Learning a Map by Blind and Sighted People. The Cartographic Journal 34, 2, 93--110.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  49. Simon Ungar. 2000. Cognitive Mapping without Visual Experience. In Cognitive mapping: past, present, and future. 221.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. Rayoung Yang, Sangmi Park, Sonali R Mishra, et al. 2011. Supporting Spatial Awareness and Independent Wayfinding for Pedestrians with Visual Impairments. The Proceedings of the 13th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility, 27--34. http://doi.org/10.1145/2049536.2049544 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  51. Robert K. Yin. 2014. Case study research: Design and methods. Sage publications. Sage publications.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. John Zelek, Richard Audette, Jocelyn Balthazaar, and Craig Dunk. 1999. A Stereo-vision System for the Visually Impaired.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Landmark identification with wearables for supporting spatial awareness by blind persons

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        UbiComp '15: Proceedings of the 2015 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing
        September 2015
        1302 pages
        ISBN:9781450335744
        DOI:10.1145/2750858

        Copyright © 2015 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 7 September 2015

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        UbiComp '15 Paper Acceptance Rate101of394submissions,26%Overall Acceptance Rate764of2,912submissions,26%

        Upcoming Conference

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader