Abstract
Voice-activated personal assistants (VAPAs) are becoming smaller, cheaper, and more accurate, such that they are now prevalent in homes (e.g., Amazon Echo, Sonos One) and on mobile devices (e.g., Google Assistant, Apple Siri) around the world. VAPAs offer considerable potential to individuals who are blind, offering efficiencies over gesture-based input on touchscreen devices. However, research is just beginning to reveal the ways in which these technologies are used by people who are blind. In the first of two studies, we interviewed 14 blind adults with experience of home and/or mobile-based VAPAs, surfacing myriad accessibility, usability, and privacy issues for this community. A second study analyzing podcast content from 28 episodes relating to blind interactions with VAPAs was then undertaken to validate and extend findings from the first study. In addition to verifying prior findings, we learned that blind users wanted to leverage VAPAs for more productivity-oriented tasks and increased efficiency over other interaction modalities. We conclude that (1) VAPAs need to support a greater variety of AI personas, each specializing in a specific type of task; (2) VAPAs need to maintain continuity of voice interaction for both usability and accessibility; and (3) blind VAPA users, and especially blind technology podcasters, are expert voice interface users who should be incorporated into design processes from the beginning. We argue that when the blind lead the sighted through voice interface design, both blind and sighted users can benefit.
- A. Abdolrahmani, R. Kuber, and A. Hurst. 2016. An empirical investigation of the situationally-induced impairments experienced by blind mobile device users. In Proceedings of the 13th Web for All Conference (W4A’16). 21, 1--8.Google Scholar
- A. Abdolrahmani, R. Kuber, and S. M. Branham. 2018. Siri talks at you: An empirical investigation of voice-activated personal assistant (VAPA) usage by individuals who are blind. In Proceedings of the 20th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS’18). 249--258.Google Scholar
- J. Albouys-Perrois, J. Laviole, C. Briant, and A. M. Brock. 2018. Towards a multisensory augmented reality map for blind and low vision people: A participatory design approach. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’18). ACM, New York, NY, 629, 1--629:14. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3174203Google Scholar
- L. Anthony, Y. Kim, and L. Findlater. 2013. Analyzing user-generated YouTube videos to understand touchscreen use by people with motor impairments. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1223--1232.Google Scholar
- S. Azenkot and N. B. Lee. 2013. Exploring the use of speech input by blind people on mobile devices. In Proceedings of the 15th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS’13). 11, 1--8.Google Scholar
- A. Ballantyne. 2019. Fair compensation or undue inducement? Yale Interdisciplinary Center for Bioethics. Retrieved from: https://bioethics.yale.edu/research/irb-case-studies/irb-case-payments-subjects-who-are-substance-abusers/fair-compensation-or.Google Scholar
- M. Baldauf, R. Bösch, C. Frei, F. Hautle, and M. Jenny. 2018. Exploring requirements and opportunities of conversational user interfaces for the cognitively impaired. In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services Adjunct. 119--126.Google Scholar
- F. Bentley, C. Luvogt, M. Silverman, R. Wirasinghe, B. White, and D. Lottrjdge. 2018. Understanding the long-term use of smart speaker assistants. Proc.e ACM Interact., Mob., Wear. Ubiq. Technol. 2, 3 (2018), 91.Google ScholarDigital Library
- T. Bogers, A. A. A. Al-Basri, C. O. Rytlig, M. E. B. Møller, M. J. Rasmussen, N. K. B. Michelsen, and S. G. Jørgensen. 2019. A study of usage and usability of intelligent personal assistants in Denmark. In Proceedings of the International iConference (iConference’19).Google Scholar
- E. C. Bouck, S. Flanagan, G. S. Joshi, W. Sheikh, and D. Schleppenbach. 2011. Speaking math—A voice input, speech output calculator for students with visual impairments. J. Spec. Educ. Technol. 26, 4 (2011), 1--14.Google ScholarCross Ref
- S. M. Branham, A. Abdolrahmani, W. Easley, M. Scheuerman, E. Ronquillo, and A. Hurst. 2017. Is someone there? Do they have a gun?: How visual information about others can improve personal safety management for blind individuals. In Proceedings of the 19th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS’17). 260--269.Google Scholar
- S. M. Branham and S. K. Kane. 2015. Collaborative accessibility: How blind and sighted companions co-create accessible home spaces. In Proceedings of the 33rd ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’15). ACM, New York, NY, 2373--2382. https://doi.org/10.1145/2702123.2702511.Google Scholar
- S. M. Branham and A. R. Mukkath Roy. 2019. Reading between the guidelines: How commercial voice assistant guidelines hinder accessibility for blind users. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers 8 Accessibility (ASSETS’19).Google Scholar
- R. N. Brewer, M. Cartwright, E. Karp, B. Pardo, and A. M. Piper. 2016. An approach to audio-only editing for visually impaired seniors. In Proceedings of the 18th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS’16). ACM, New York, NY, 307--308. https://doi.org/10.1145/2982142.2982196Google Scholar
- R. M. Brewer and A. M. Piper. 2017. Rethinking design for aging and accessibility through an IVR blogging system. Proc, ACM Hum,-Comput, Interact. 1, CSCW, Article 26 (December 2017), 17 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3139354Google Scholar
- C. Carroll, C. Chiodo, A. Lin, M. Nidever, and J. Prathipati. 2017. Robin: Enabling independence for individuals with cognitive disabilities using voice assistive technology. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 46--53.Google Scholar
- K. Charmaz. 2006. Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide through Qualitative Analysis. Sage.Google Scholar
- M. L. Chen and H. C. Wang. 2018. How personal experience and technical knowledge affect using conversational agents. In Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces Companion (IUI’18). 53:1--2.Google Scholar
- C. Chhetri and V. G. Motti. 2019. Eliciting privacy concerns for smart home devices from a user centered perspective. In Proceedings of the International iConference (iConference’19).Google Scholar
- A. Coskun-Setirek and S. Mardikyan. 2017. Understanding the adoption of voice activated personal assistants. Int. J. E-Serv. Mob. Appl. 9, 3 (2017), 1--21.Google ScholarDigital Library
- B. R. Cowan, N. Pantidi, D. Coyle, K. Morrissey, P. Clarke, S. Al-Shehri, D. Earley, and N. Bandeira. 2017. What can I help you with?: Infrequent users’ experiences of intelligent personal assistants. In Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services (MobileHCI’17). 43 1--12.Google Scholar
- A. E. Chung, A. C. Griffin, D. Selezneva, and D. Gotz. 2018. Health and fitness apps for hands-free voice-activated assistants: Content analysis. JMIR mHealth uHealth 6, 9 (2018), e174.Google Scholar
- M. Dee and V. L. Hanson. 2016. A pool of representative users for accessibility research: Seeing through the eyes of the users. ACM Trans. Access. Comput. 8, 1 (2016), 4.Google ScholarDigital Library
- A. Easwara Moorthy and K. P. L. Vu. 2015. Privacy concerns for use of voice activated personal assistant in the public space. Int. J. Hum.-Compu. Interact. 31, 4 (2015), 307--335.Google ScholarCross Ref
- C. Efthymiou and M. Halvey. 2016. Evaluating the social acceptability of voice based smartwatch search. In Proceedings of the Asia Information Retrieval Symposium. 267--278.Google Scholar
- I. Guy. 2016. Searching by talking: Analysis of voice queries on mobile web search. In Proceedings of the 39th International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval (SIGIR’16). 35--44.Google ScholarDigital Library
- S. Han and H. Yang. 2018. Understanding adoption of intelligent personal assistants: A parasocial relationship perspective. Industr. Manag. Data Syst. 118, 3 (2018), 618--636.Google ScholarCross Ref
- J. Lazar, A. Allen, J. Kleinman, and C. Malarkey. 2007. What frustrates screen reader users on the web: A study of 100 blind users. Int. J. Hum.--Comput. Interact. 22, 3 (2007), 247--269.Google Scholar
- Y. Liao, J. Vitak, P. Kumar, M. Zimmer, and K. Kritikos. 2019. Understanding the role of privacy and trust in intelligent personal assistant adoption. In Proceedings of the International iConference (iConference’19).Google Scholar
- I. Lopatovska, K. Rink, I. Knight, K. Raines, K. Cosenza, H. Williams, P. Sorsche, D. Hirsch, Q. Li, and A. Martinez. 2018. Talk to me: Exploring user interactions with the Amazon Alexa. J. Librar. Inform. Sci. 51, 4 (2018), 984--97.Google Scholar
- S. B. Lovato and A. M. Piper. 2015. Siri, is this you?: Understanding young children's interactions with voice input systems. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children (IDC’15). ACM, New York, NY, 335--338. https://doi.org/10.1145/2771839.2771910Google Scholar
- S. B. Lovato, A. M. Piper, and E. A. Wartella. 2019. Hey Google, do unicorns exist?: Conversational agents as a path to answers to children's questions. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM International Conference on Interaction Design and Children (IDC’19). ACM, New York, NY, 301--313. https://doi.org/10.1145/3311927.3323150Google Scholar
- E. Luger and A. Sellen. 2016. Like having a really bad PA: The gulf between user expectation and experience of conversational agents. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’16). 5286--5297.Google Scholar
- W. E. Mackay and A. L. Fayard. 1997. HCI, natural science and design: A framework for triangulation across disciplines. In Proceedings of the 2nd Conference on Designing Interactive Systems: Processes, Practices, Methods and Techniques. 223--234.Google Scholar
- N. Mallat, V. Tuunainen, and K. Wittkowski. 2017. Voice activated personal assistants--Consumer use contexts and usage behavior. In Proceedings of the Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS’17). Retrieved from: https://aisel.aisnet.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1548&context==amcis2017.Google Scholar
- A. R. Mukkath Roy, A. Abdolrahmani, R. Kuber, and S. M. Branham. 2019. Beyond being human: The (In) accessibility consequences of modeling VAPAs after human-human conversation. In Proceedings of the International iConference (iConference’19).Google Scholar
- A. M. Mulloy, C. Gevarter, M. Hopkins, K. S. Sutherland, and S. T. Ramdoss. 2014. Assistive technology for students with visual impairments and blindness. Assistive Technologies for People with Diverse Abilities. Springer, 113--156.Google Scholar
- E. Murphy, R. Kuber, G. McAllister, P. Strain, and W. Yu. 2008. An empirical investigation into the difficulties experienced by visually impaired internet users. Univ. Access Inform. Soc. 7 (1--2), 79--91.Google Scholar
- H. Nicolau, K. Montague, T. Guerreiro, A. Rodrigues, and V. L. Hanson. 2017. Investigating laboratory and everyday typing performance of blind users. ACM Trans. Access. Comput. 10, 1 4 1--4:26. https://doi.org/10.1145/3046785Google ScholarDigital Library
- M. Palmer. 2011. Disability and poverty: A conceptual review. J. Disab. Policy Stud. 21, 4 (2011), 210--218.Google ScholarCross Ref
- F. Portet, M. Vacher, C. Golanski, C. Roux, and B. Meillon. 2013. Design and evaluation of a smart home voice interface for the elderly: Acceptability and objection aspects. Person. Ubiq. Comput. 17, 1 (2013), 127--144.Google ScholarDigital Library
- A. Pradhan, K. Mehta, and L. Findlater. 2018. Accessibility came by accident: Use of voice-controlled intelligent personal assistants by people with disabilities. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’18). 459:1--13.Google Scholar
- L. Ran, S. Helal, and S. Moore. 2004. Drishti: An integrated indoor/outdoor blind navigation system and service. In Proceedings of the 2nd IEEE Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications (PerCom’04). 23--30. https://doi.org/10.1109/PERCOM.2004.1276842Google Scholar
- S. H. Reinharz and L. Davidman. 1992. Feminist Methods in Social Research. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- A. Rodrigues, L. Camacho, H. Nicolau, K. Montague, and T. Guerreiro. 2018. Aidme: Interactive non-visual smartphone tutorials. In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services Adjunct (MobileHCI’18). ACM, New York, NY, 205--212. https://doi.org/10.1145/3236112.3236141Google Scholar
- G. Schiavo, O. Mich, M. Ferron, and N. Mana. 2017. Mobile multimodal interaction for older and younger users: Exploring differences and similarities. In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Multimedia (MUM’17). 407--414.Google Scholar
- A. Sears and V. Hanson. 2011. Representing users in accessibility research. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 2235--2238.Google Scholar
- Kristen Shinohara and Josh Tenenberg. 2007. Observing Sara: A case study of a blind person's interactions with technology. In Proceedings of the 9th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS’07). ACM, New York, NY, 171--178. https://doi.org/10.1145/1296843.1296873Google ScholarDigital Library
- K. Shinohara and J. O. Wobbrock. 2011. In the shadow of misperception: Assistive technology use and social interactions. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’11). 705--714.Google Scholar
- K. Shinohara, J. O. Wobbrock, and W. Pratt. 2018. Incorporating social factors in accessible design. In Proceedings of the 20th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS’18). ACM, New York, NY, 149--160.Google Scholar
- Kevin M. Storer and Stacy M. Branham. 2019. That's the way sighted people do it: What blind parents can teach technology designers about co-reading with children. In Proceedings of the Designing Interactive Systems Conference (DIS’19). ACM, New York, NY, 385--398. https://doi.org/10.1145/3322276.3322374Google Scholar
- M. F. Story, J. L. Mueller, and R. L. Mace. 1998. The universal design file: Designing for people of all ages and abilities. School of Design, the Center for Universal Design, NC State, Raleigh.Google Scholar
- A. Vtyurina, A. Fourney, M. R. Morris, L. Findlater, and R. W. White. 2019a. Bridging screen readers and voice assistants for enhanced eyes-free web search. In Proceedings of the World Wide Web Conference. ACM, 3590--3594.Google Scholar
- A. Vtyurina, A. Fourney, M. R. Morris, L. Findlater, and R. W. White. 2019b. VERSE: Bridging screen readers and voice assistants for enhanced eyes-free web search. In Proceedings of the 21st International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility. ACM.Google Scholar
- L. Wulf, M. Garschall, J. Himmelsbach, and M. Tscheligi. 2014. Hands free—care free: Elderly people taking advantage of speech-only interaction. In Proceedings of the 8th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Fun, Fast, Foundational (NordiCHI’14). 203--206.Google Scholar
- C. Yu, H. Shane, R. W. Schlosser, A. O'Brien, A. Allen, J. Abramson, and S. Flynn. 2018. An exploratory study of speech-language pathologists using the Echo Show™ to deliver visual supports. Adv. Neurodev. Disord. 2, 3 (2018), 286--292.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Y. Zhong, T. V. Raman, C. Burkhardt, F. Biadsy, and J. P. Bigham. 2014. JustSpeak: Enabling universal voice control on Android. In Proceedings of Web for All Conference (W4A’14). 36 1--4.Google Scholar
Index Terms
Blind Leading the Sighted: Drawing Design Insights from Blind Users towards More Productivity-oriented Voice Interfaces
Recommendations
Best practices in an online community for blind, partly sighted and fully sighted children
OZCHI '05: Proceedings of the 17th Australia conference on Computer-Human Interaction: Citizens Online: Considerations for Today and the FutureCareful design and assistive technologies can make websites fully accessible to people with visual impairments. However, accessibility does not equate with usability or usefulness for the target audience. The Sonokids website has been developed to bring ...
Perceptions of accessibility and usability by blind or visually impaired persons: a pilot study
ASIST '16: Proceedings of the 79th ASIS&T Annual Meeting: Creating Knowledge, Enhancing Lives through Information & TechnologyThis pilot study utilizes qualitative interviews to explore perceptions of accessibility and usability from the perspective of blind or visually impaired (BVI) persons. Using the frameworks of everyday life information seeking (ELIS) and the sense-...
What Makes Videos Accessible to Blind and Visually Impaired People?
CHI '21: Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsUser-generated videos are an increasingly important source of information online, yet most online videos are inaccessible to blind and visually impaired (BVI) people. To find videos that are accessible, or understandable without additional description ...
Comments