skip to main content
10.1145/3357155.3358480acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesihcConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Usability evaluation of a resource to read mathematical formulae in a screen reader for people with visual disabilities

Published:22 October 2019Publication History

ABSTRACT

The teaching of mathematics for visually disabled users still has limitations. One such limitation is related to limited reading of mathematical expressions by screen reading software. With the technological advances, the use of assistive technologies by these people became fundamental for the educational process. However, this technology still has gaps in the ability to read complex expressions and language support, especially in the Brazilian context. Thus, the present study presents usability tests involving visually disabled users on a prototype of screen reading software with reading of mathematical formulae in Brazilian Portuguese and intra-formulae navigation features, named ChromeVox-NavMatBR system. The tests involved 12 users. The evaluations involved the assessmenet of features related to navigation, reading and comprehension of mathematical expressions. Finally, quantitative and qualitative data were collected regarding the use of the system. The study encountered problems related to prosody aspects in formulae reading, response time, comprehension of specific technical terms, and reading of complex mathematical elements. The results in this paper are very important to direct continued development of interactive features to support reading and navigation in complex mathematical content on the Web for people with visual disabilities.

References

  1. Simone Barbosa and Bruno Silva. 2010. Interação humano-computador. Elsevier Brasil.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. John Brooke et al. 1996. SUS-A quick and dirty usability scale. Usability evaluation in industry 189, 194 (1996), 4--7.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. World Wide Web Consortium. 2008. Web content accessibility guidelines (WCAG) 2.0. Disponível online em http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20, acesso em 20 de agosto de 2019.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Albert M. Cook and Janice Miller Polgar. 2014. Assistive Technologies-E-Book: Principles and Practice. Elsevier Health Sciences.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. João Marcelo dos Santos Marques, Simone Bacellar Leal Ferreira, and Claudia Cappelli Cappelli. 2018. Catálogo e um Guia para orientar analistas web na construção de sites governamentais para o entendimento de informaçães gráficas para cidadãos cegos à luz da transparência da informação. iSys-Revista Brasileira de Sistemas de Informação 11, 1 (2018), 71--102.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Joseph S. Dumas, Joseph S. Dumas, and Janice Redish. 1999. A practical guide to usability testing. Intellect books.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Alistair DN Edwards. 1989. Modelling blind users' interactions with an auditory computer interface. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 30, 5 (1989), 575--589.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Alistair DN Edwards, Heather McCartney, and Flavio Fogarolo. 2006. Lambda:: a multimodal approach to making mathematics accessible to blind students. In 8th International Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS). 48--54.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Karl Anders Ericsson and Herbert Alexander Simon. 1993. Protocol analysis. MIT press Cambridge, MA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Helder Ferreira and Diamantino Freitas. 2006. Leitura de Fórmulas Matemáticas para Cegos e Amblíopes: A Aplicação AudioMath. In Atas do IV Congresso Ibero-americano de Tecnologia de Apoio. 137--142.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Anonymous for blind review. 2017. How Much Effort is Necessary for Blind Users to Read Web-based Mathematical Formulae?: A comparison using task models with different screen readers. In Proceedings of the XVI Brazilian Symposium on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 29.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Anonyous for blind review. 2018. Content-based Navigation Within Mathematical Formulae On the Web For Blind Users and Its Impact On Expected User Effort. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Software Development and Technologies for Enhancing Accessibility and Fighting Info-exclusion. ACM, 23--32.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. André Pimenta Freire, Silvana Maria Affonso de Lara, and Renata Pontin de Mattos Fortes. 2013. Avaliação da acessibilidade de websites por usuários com deficiência. In 12th Brazilian Symposium on Human Factors in Computing Systems (HCI). 348--351.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Mick D. Isaacson, Dave Schleppenbach, and Lyle Lloyd. 2010. Increasing STEM accessibility in students with print disabilities through MathSpeak. Journal of Science Education for Students with Disabilities 14, 1 (2010), 3.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Jonathan Lazar, Jinjuan Heidi Feng, and Harry Hochheiser. 2017. Research methods in human-computer interaction. Morgan Kaufmann.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. MathSpeak. 2004. MathSpeakTM Core Specification Grammar Rules. Disponível em http://www.gh-mathspeak.com/examples/grammar-rules/, último acesso em 03 de novembro de 2018.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. TV Raman. 1994. Audio system for technical readings. Ph.D. Dissertation. Cornell University.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Andrzej Salamonczyk and Jolanta Brzostek-Pawlowska. 2015. Translation of MathML formulas to Polish text, example applications in teaching the blind. In 2nd International Conference on Cybernetics (CYBCONF). 240--244.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Jeff Sauro and James R. Lewis. 2016. Quantifying the user experience: Practical statistics for user research. Morgan Kaufmann.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Neil Soiffer. 2005. MathPlayer: web-based math accessibility. In 7th International Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS). 204--205.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Neil Soiffer. 2007. MathPlayer v2. 1: web-based math accessibility. In 9th International Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS). 257--258.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Volker Sorge, Charles Chen, TV Raman, and David Tseng. 2014. Towards making mathematics a first class citizen in general screen readers. In 11th Web for All Conference ((W4A). 40.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Robert D. Stevens, Alistair DN Edwards, and Philip A. Harling. 1997. Access to mathematics for visually disabled students through multimodal interaction. Human-computer interaction 12, 1 (1997), 47--92.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Wararat Wongkia, Kanlaya Naruedomkul, and Nick Cercone. 2012. i-Math: Automatic math reader for Thai blind and visually impaired students. Computers & Mathematics with Applications 64, 6 (2012), 2128--2140.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  1. Usability evaluation of a resource to read mathematical formulae in a screen reader for people with visual disabilities

      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 Other conferences
        IHC '19: Proceedings of the 18th Brazilian Symposium on Human Factors in Computing Systems
        October 2019
        679 pages
        ISBN:9781450369718
        DOI:10.1145/3357155

        Copyright © 2019 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: 22 October 2019

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        IHC '19 Paper Acceptance Rate56of165submissions,34%Overall Acceptance Rate331of973submissions,34%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader