skip to main content
10.1145/3334480.3375200acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
extended-abstract

Feeling Your Way Around: Assessing the Perceived Utility of Multi-Scale Indoor Tactile Maps

Authors Info & Claims
Published:25 April 2020Publication History

ABSTRACT

Tactile maps of indoor spaces have great potential for supporting pre-journey spatial learning by blind travelers. Due to the limited resolution of tactile sensing, though, only a limited amount of spatial detail can be embossed in a map at a certain scale. We conducted a focus group with blind participants in order to obtain some insight on the perceived utility of using multiple maps at different spatial scales, and thus different levels of detail, to represent the interior of a building.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

cs018pv.mp4

mp4

3.1 MB

cs1239vf.mp4

mp4

101.4 MB

References

  1. Nacny Amick, Jane Corcoran, and others. 1997. Guidelines for the design of tactile graphics. American Printing House for the Blind (1997).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Ferdinando Auricchio, Alessandro Greco, Gianluca Alaimo, Valentina Giacometti, Stefania Marconi, and Valeria Mauri. 2017. 3D printing technology for buildings accessibility: the tactile map for MTE museum in Pavia. J. Civ. Eng. Archit 11 (2017), 736--747.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Mark Blades, Simon Ungar, and Christopher Spencer. 1999. Map use by adults with visual impairments. The Professional Geographer 51, 4 (1999), 539--553.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Petr Cervenka, Karel Brinda, Michaela Hanousková, Petr Hofman, and Radek Seifert. 2016. Blind friendly maps. In International Conference on Computers Helping People with Special Needs. Springer, 131--138.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Polly Edman. 1992. Tactile graphics. American Foundation for the Blind.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Nicholas A Giudice, Hari Prasath Palani, Eric Brenner, and Kevin M Kramer. 2012. Learning non-visual graphical information using a touch-based vibro-audio interface. In Proceedings of the 14th international ACM SIGACCESS conference on Computers and accessibility. ACM, 103--110.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Mihail Ivanchev, Francis Zinke, and Ulrike Lucke. 2014. Pre-journey visualization of travel routes for the blind on refreshable interactive tactile displays. In International Conference on Computers for Handicapped Persons. Springer, 81--88.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Cheng-Lung Lee. 2019. An evaluation of tactile symbols in public environment for the visually impaired. Applied ergonomics 75 (2019), 193--200.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Gordon E Legge, Cindee Madison, Brenna N Vaughn, Allen MY Cheong, and Joseph C Miller. 2008. Retention of high tactile acuity throughout the life span in blindness. Perception & psychophysics 70, 8 (2008), 1471--1488.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Daniele Leonardis, Loconsole Claudio, and Antonio Frisoli. 2017. A survey on innovative refreshable braille display technologies. In International Conference on Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics. Springer, 488--498.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Amy Lobben and Megan Lawrence. 2012. The use of environmental features on tactile maps by navigators who are blind. The Professional Geographer 64, 1 (2012), 95--108.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Jack M Loomis, Roberta L Klatzky, and Nicholas A Giudice. 2013. Representing 3D space in working memory: Spatial images from vision, hearing, touch, and language. In Multisensory imagery. Springer, 131--155.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Alan M MacEachren. 2004. How maps work: representation, visualization, and design. Guilford Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Joshua A Miele, Steven Landau, and Deborah Gilden. 2006. Talking TMAP: Automated generation of audio-tactile maps using Smith-Kettlewell's TMAP software. British Journal of Visual Impairment 24, 2 (2006), 93--100.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Mark Monmonier. 2018. How to lie with maps. University of Chicago Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Lynn Nadel and Lloyd MacDonald. 1980. Hippocampus: Cognitive map or working memory? Behavioral and neural biology 29, 3 (1980), 405--409.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Konstantinos Papadopoulos, Marialena Barouti, and Konstantinos Charitakis. 2014. A university indoors audio-tactile mobility aid for individuals with blindness. In International Conference on Computers for Handicapped Persons. Springer, 108--115.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Denise Prescher, Jens Bornschein, and Gerhard Weber. 2017. Consistency of a Tactile Pattern Set. ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing (TACCESS) 10, 2 (2017), 7.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Jonathan Rowell. 2007. The end of tactile mapping or a new beginning: LBS for visually impaired people. In Papers. XXIII International Cartographic Conference. 4--10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Hao Tang, Norbu Tsering, Feng Hu, and Zhigang Zhu. 2016. Automatic pre-journey indoor map generation using autocad floor plan. (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Guillaume Touya, Sidonie Christophe, Jean-Marie Favreau, and Amine Ben Rhaiem. 2019. Automatic derivation of on-demand tactile maps for visually impaired people: first experiments and research agenda. International Journal of Cartography 5, 1 (2019), 67--91.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Viet Trinh and Roberto Manduchi. 2019. Semantic Interior Mapology: A Toolbox For Indoor Scene Description From Architectural Floor Plans. In The 24th International Conference on 3D Web Technology (Web3D '19). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1--2. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3329714.3338141Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Tetsuya Watanabe, Toshimitsu Yamaguchi, Satoko Koda, and Kazunori Minatani. 2014. Tactile map automated creation system using openstreetmap. In International Conference on Computers for Handicapped Persons. Springer, 42--49.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Feeling Your Way Around: Assessing the Perceived Utility of Multi-Scale Indoor Tactile Maps

      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
        CHI EA '20: Extended Abstracts of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
        April 2020
        4474 pages
        ISBN:9781450368193
        DOI:10.1145/3334480

        Copyright © 2020 Owner/Author

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all 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 third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 25 April 2020

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • extended-abstract

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate6,164of23,696submissions,26%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      HTML Format

      View this article in HTML Format .

      View HTML Format