Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
SLX-Digitalkonferenz: Zukunftswerkstatt 2024

Mehr Umsatz mit Top-Kontakten

Am 7. Mai erfahren Sie, wie Vertriebsteams Leadgenerierung, Leadnurturing und Leadstrategien effizient steuern können.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Erschienen in:
Digital Transformation and Human Behavior: An Introduction Kapitel lesen Erstes Kapitel lesen

2021 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

Technology Mediated Interaction for Users with Learning Disabilities: A Scoping Review

verfasst von : Nabil Georges Badr, Michele Kosremelli Asmar

Erschienen in: Digital Transformation and Human Behavior

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Developers of computer systems and interfaces compete to produce tools that are usable and useful in the sense of assisting potential users to achieve the desired result. This usefulness angle of the discussion is what prompts us to look at existing knowledge on the potential of technology for improving social interaction and inclusion of people with learning disability (LD). We investigate how the extant literature guides conversation around premises of assistive devices and information technologies, in the context of improving interaction with people with LD for an inclusive value co-creation in our digital society of today. Through the lens of the DART framework, the four pillars of interaction of (Dialogue, Access, Risk, and Transparency), our approach seeks to explore how the current literature treats this contemporary topic.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren
Vorheriges Kapitel New Technologies for Preventing and Reducing Verbal and Non-verbal Assaults Against Healthcare Professionals Within Hospitals: The State of Art
Nächstes Kapitel Social and Ethical Shifts in the Digital Age: Digital Technologies for Governing or Digital Technologies that Govern?
Fußnoten
1
WHO global disability action plan, 2014–2021: better health for all people with disability. 2015:32.
 
3
The US Technology-Related Assistance for Individuals with Disabilities Act (P.L. 108–364).
 
Literatur
1.
Hall, S. A. (2009). The social inclusion of people with disabilities: A qualitative meta-analysis. Journal of Ethnographic & Qualitative Research, 3(3).
2.
Verdonschot, M. M., de Witte, L. P., Reichrath, E., et al. (2009). Impact of environmental factors on community participation of persons with an intellectual disability: A systematic review. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 53, 54–64.CrossRef
3.
Parsons, S., Guldberg, K., Porayska-Pomsta, K., & Lee, R. (2015). Digital stories as a method for evidence-based practice and knowledge co-creation in technology-enhanced learning for children with autism. International Journal of Research and Method in Education, 38(3), 247–271.CrossRef
4.
Rotondi, A. J., Sinkule, J., Haas, G. L., Spring, M. B., Litschge, C. M., Newhill, C. E., et al. (2007). Designing websites for persons with cognitive deficits: Design and usability of a psychoeducational intervention for persons with severe mental illness. Psychological Services, 4(3), 202.
5.
Hoppestad, B. S. (2013). Current perspective regarding adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities accessing computer technology. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 8(3), 190–194.
6.
Raskin, J. (2000). The humane interface: New directions for designing interactive systems. Addison-Wesley Professional.
7.
Mwanza, D. (2001). Where theory meets practice: A case for an activity theory based methodology to guide computer system design. In: Proceedings of INTERACT’ 2001: Eighth IFIP TC 13 Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, July 9–13, 2001, Tokyo, Japan.
8.
Constantine L., & Lockwood, L. (2001). Structure and style in use cases for user interfaces. In M. van Harmelan (Ed.), Object modeling and user interface design. Boston: Addison-Wesley (2001)
9.
Peters, M. D., Godfrey, C. M., Khalil, H., McInerney, P., Parker, D., & Soares, C. B. (2015). Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews. International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare, 13(3), 141–146.CrossRef
10.
Johns, R., & Davey, J. (2019). Introducing the transformative service mediator: Value creation with vulnerable consumers. Journal of Services Marketing.
11.
12.
Breidbach, C. F., & Maglio, P. P. (2016). Technology-enabled value co-creation: An empirical analysis of actors, resources, and practices. IND Market Manage, 56, 73–85.CrossRef
13.
Wass, S. V., & Porayska-Pomsta, K. (2014). The uses of cognitive training technologies in the treatment of autism spectrum disorders. Autism, 18(8), 851–871.CrossRef
14.
Prahalad, C. K., & Ramaswamy, V. (2004). Co-creation experiences: The next practice in value creation. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 18(3), 5–14.CrossRef
15.
Solakis, K., Peña-Vinces, J. C., & Lopéz-Bonilla, J. M. (2017). DART model from a customer’s perspective: An exploratory study in the hospitality industry of Greece. Problem Perspective Manage, 15(2), 536–548.CrossRef
16.
Dikter, D. (2004). Outcomes and benefits-challenges in the assistive technology field. Assistive Technology Outcomes Benefits, 1(1), 6–7.
17.
Butler, D. L. (2004). Adults with learning disabilities. In Learning about Learning Disabilities (3rd. edn., pp. 565–598).
18.
Alper, S., & Raharinirina, S. (2006). Assistive technology for individuals with disabilities: A review and synthesis of the literature. JSET, 21(2), 47–64.
19.
Brodwin, M. G., Star, T., & Cardoso, E. (2004). Computer assistive technology for people who have disabilities: Computer adaptations and modifications. Journal of Rehabilitation, 70(3), 28.
20.
Gillespie, A., Best, C., & O’Neill, B. (2012). Cognitive function and assistive technology for cognition: A systematic review. Journal of International Neuropsychology Society, 18(1), 1–19.CrossRef
21.
Foley, A., & Ferri, B. A. (2012). Technology for people, not disabilities: Ensuring access and inclusion. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 12(4), 192–200.CrossRef
22.
Giakoumis, D., Kaklanis, N., Votis, K., & Tzovaras, D. (2014). Enabling user interface developers to experience accessibility limitations through visual, hearing, physical and cognitive impairment simulation. Universal Access in the Information Society, 13(2), 227–248.CrossRef
23.
Shneiderman, B., & Plaisant, C. (2010). Designing the user interface: Strategies for effective human-computer interaction. Pearson Education India.
24.
Brewer, J. (Ed.). (2005). How people with disabilities use the web: Working group internal draft, May 5, 2005. W3C.
25.
Hagelkruys, D., & Motschnig, R. (2017). The LITERACY-portal as the subject of a case study on a human-centered design solution supporting users with special needs. International Journal on E-Learning, 16(2), 129–147.
26.
Jaeger, P. T., & Xie, B. (2019). Developing online community accessibility guidelines for persons with disabilities and older adults. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 20(1), 55–63.CrossRef
27.
Cohen, A., Goodman, L., Keaveney, S., Keogh, C., & Dillenburger, K. (2017). Sustaining a caring relationship at a distance: Can haptics and 3D technologies overcome the deficits in 2D direct synchronous video based communication? In 2017 23rd International Conference on Virtual System Multimedia (VSMM) (pp. 1–6). IEEE.
28.
Knochel, A. D., Hsiao, W. H., & Pittenger, A. (2018). Touching to see: Tactile learning, assistive technologies, and 3-D printing. Art Education, 71(3), 7–13.CrossRef
29.
Owuor, J., Larkan, F., Kayabu, B., Fitzgerald, G., Sheaf, G., et al. (2018). Does assistive technology contribute to social inclusion for people with intellectual disability? A systematic review protocol. BMJ Open, 8(2), e017533.
30.
Harper, S., & Yesilada, Y. (2011). Web accessibility: Current trends. Handbook of Research on Personal Autonomy Technologies and Disability Informatics, 1, 172–190.CrossRef
31.
Sloan, D., Dickinson, A., McIlroy, N., & Gibson, L. (2006). Evaluating the usability of online accessibility information. University of Dundee.
32.
33.
Anderson, S., Bohman, P. R., Burmeister, O. K., & Sampson-Wild, G. (2004). User needs and e-government accessibility: The future impact of WCAG 2.0. In ERCIM workshop on user interfaces for all (pp. 289–304). Berlin: Springer.
34.
Hudson, R., & Weakley, R., & Firminger, P. (2005). An accessibility frontier: Cognitive disabilities and learning difficulties. Webusability—Accessibility and Usability Services.
35.
Rowland, C. (2004). Cognitive disabilities part 2: Conceptualizing design considerations. Web aim—Accessibility in Mind.
36.
Hellman, R. (2007). Universal design and mobile devices. In International Conference on Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction (pp. 147–156). Berlin: Springer.
37.
Lazar, J., & Stein, M. A. (Eds.). (2017). Disability, human rights, and information technology. University of Pennsylvania Press.
38.
Shokuhi Targhi, S. A. (2017). Study of mobile accessibility for users of IOS voice over.
39.
Harper, S., & Chen, A. Q. (2012). Web accessibility guidelines. WorldWideWeb, 15(1), 61–88.
40.
Jokisuu, E., Langdon, P. M., & Clarkson, P. J. (2012). A framework for studying cognitive impairment to inform inclusive design. In Designing inclusive systems (pp. 115–124). Springer, London.
41.
Loup-Escande, E., Christmann, O., Damiano, R., Hernoux, F., & Richir, S. (2012). Virtual reality learning software for individuals with intellectual disabilities: comparison between touchscreen and mouse interactions. In International Conference on Disability, Virtual Reality and Associated Technologies (9; 2012; Laval) (pp. 295–303). The University of Reading.
42.
Ahrar, N., & Rahman, A. A. (2012). Value co-creation attributes which influence on e-services: The case of UTM Institutional Repository. IJERD, 2(9), 46–50.
43.
Pareto, L., & Snis, U. L. (2006). Understanding users with reading disabilities or reduced vision: Toward a universal design of an auditory, location-aware museum guide. International Journal on Disability and Human Development, 5(2), 147–154.CrossRef
44.
Rodriguez-Sanchez, M. C., Moreno-Alvarez, M. A., Martin, E., Borromeo, S., & Hernandez-Tamames, J. A. (2014). Accessible smartphones for blind users: A case study for a wayfinding system. Expert Systems with Applications, 41(16), 7210–7222.CrossRef
45.
Vanderheiden, G. C., Chourasia, A., Tobias, J., & Githens, S. (2006). The library GPII system. In International Conference on Universal Access in HCI (pp. 494–505). Cham: Springer.
46.
Summers, K., & Langford, J. (2015). The impact of literacy on usable and accessible electronic voting. In International Conference on Universal Access in HCI (pp. 248–257). Cham: Springer.
47.
Duhaney, L. M. G., & Duhaney, D. C. (2000). Assistive technology: Meeting the needs of learners with disabilities. International Journal of Instructional Media, 27(4), 393–393.
48.
Hagelkruys, D., & Motschnig, R. (2014). Designing a web-portal supporting the social inclusion of a specific user group. A case study of the LITERACY-portal. In EdMedia+ Innovate Learning (pp. 267–277). AACE.
49.
Picking, R., Robinet, A., Grout, V., McGinn, J., Roy, A., Ellis, S., & Oram, D. (2009). A case study using a methodological approach to developing user interfaces for elderly and disabled people. The Computer Journal, 53(6), 842–859.CrossRef
50.
Ashby, S., & Maslin-Prothero, S. (2010). Involving older people and careers in a research project: The ‘virtual’ steering group. Healthcare Research, 239.
51.
Bodine, C. (2005). Cognitive impairments, information technology systems and the workplace. ACM SIGACCESS Accessibility and Computing, 83, 25–29.CrossRef
52.
Yi, Y. J. (2015). Compliance of Section 508 in public library systems with the largest percentage of underserved populations. Government Information Quarterly, 32(1), 75–81.CrossRef
53.
Wolf, M., Sims, J., & Yang, H. (2015). Towards understanding of value co-creation on web 2.0 platforms: An assessment methodology.
54.
Jaeger, P. T. (2006). Assessing Section 508 compliance on federal e-government Web sites: A multi-method, user-centered evaluation of accessibility for persons with disabilities. Government Information Quarterly, 23(2), 169–190.CrossRef
55.
Ruiz-Olaya, A. F., & Lara-Herrera, C. N.: Enhancing e-accessibility of disabled people using low-cost technology. In 2016 8th Euro American Conference on Telematics and Information Systems (EATIS) (pp. 1–5). IEEE.
56.
Yeager, P., Kaye, H. S., Reed, M., & Doe, T. M. (2006). Assistive technology and employment: Experiences of Californians with disabilities. Work, 27(4), 333–344.
57.
Rothberg, M. A. (2019). Designing for inclusion: Ensuring accessibility for people with disabilities. In Consumer informatics and digital health (pp. 125–143). Cham: Springer.
58.
Shneiderman, B. (2000). Universal usability. Communications of the ACM, 43(5), 85–85.CrossRef
59.
Kodagoda, N., Wong, B. L., Rooney, C., & Khan, N. (2012). Interactive visualization for low literacy users: From lessons learnt to design. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1159–1168). ACM.
60.
Manzoor, M., & Vimarlund, V. (2018). Digital technologies for social inclusion of individuals with disabilities. Health and Technology, 8(5), 377–390.CrossRef
61.
Louw, J. S. (2017). E-Inclusion: Social inclusion of young adults with intellectual disabilities-a participatory design. In AAATE Conference (pp. 269–272).
62.
MacIntyre, G. (2008). Learning disability and social inclusion. Dunedin Academic Press.
63.
Nonaka, I., & Konno, N. (1998). The concept of “Ba”: Building a foundation for knowledge creation. California Management Review, 40(3), 40–54.CrossRef
64.
Sorgini, F., Caliò, R., Carrozza, M. C., & Oddo, C. M. (2018). Haptic-assistive technologies for audition and vision sensory disabilities. Disability and Rehabilitation Assistive Technology, 13(4), 394–421.CrossRef
65.
66.
Katan, S., Grierson, M., & Fiebrink, R. (2015). Using interactive machine learning to support interface development through workshops with disabled people. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 251–254).
67.
Hagelkruys, D., Motschnig, R., Böhm, C., Vojtova, V., Kotasová, M., et al. (2015). Human-centered design in action: Designing and performing testing sessions with users with special needs. In EdMedia: World Conference on Educational Media and Technology (pp. 499–508). AACE.
68.
Magee, P., Ward, G., Moody, L., & Roebuck, A. (2017). Inclusive smartphone interface design in context: co (re) designing the PIS. In AAATE Conference (pp. 195–198)
69.
Sanders, E. B. N., & Stappers, P. J. (2018). Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. Co-Design, 4(1), 5–18.
Metadaten
Titel
Technology Mediated Interaction for Users with Learning Disabilities: A Scoping Review
verfasst von
Nabil Georges Badr
Michele Kosremelli Asmar
Copyright-Jahr
2021
Buch
Digital Transformation and Human Behavior

Print ISBN: 978-3-030-47538-3

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-030-47539-0

Copyright-Jahr: 2021

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-47539-0_20