skip to main content
10.1145/3517428.3544811acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesassetsConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

BentoMuseum: 3D and Layered Interactive Museum Map for Blind Visitors

Authors Info & Claims
Published:22 October 2022Publication History

ABSTRACT

Obtaining information before a visit is one of the priority needs and challenges for blind museum visitors. We propose BentoMuseum, a layered, stackable, and three-dimensional museum map that makes complex structural information accessible by allowing explorations on a floor and between floors. Touchpoints are embedded to provide audio-tactile interactions that allow a user to learn the museum’s exhibits and navigation when one floor is placed on a touch screen. Using a tour design task, we invited 12 first-time blind visitors to explore the museum building, chose exhibits that attracted them, and built a mental map with exhibit names and directions. The results show that the system is useful in obtaining information that links geometric shapes, contents, and locations to then build a rough mental map. The connected floors and spatial structures motivated users to explore. Moreover, having a rough mental map enhanced orientation and confidence when traveling through the museum.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

XWang_Assets22_BentoMuseum_Video.mp4

mp4

24.1 MB

References

  1. Frances Aldrich, Linda Sheppard, and Yvonne Hindle. 2002. First steps towards a model of tactile graphicacy. British Journal of Visual Impairment 20, 2 (2002), 62–67.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Vassilios S Argyropoulos and Charikleia Kanari. 2015. Re-imagining the museum through “touch”: reflections of individuals with visual disability on their experience of museum-visiting in Greece. Alter 9, 2 (2015), 130–143.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Saki Asakawa, João Guerreiro, Dragan Ahmetovic, Kris M. Kitani, and Chieko Asakawa. 2018. The Present and Future of Museum Accessibility for People with Visual Impairments. In Proceedings of the 20th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (Galway, Ireland) (ASSETS ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 382–384. https://doi.org/10.1145/3234695.3240997Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Japanese Standards Association. 2021. JIS T 0922:2007 Guidelines for older persons and persons with disabilities – Information content, shapes and display methods of tactile guide maps [In Japanese]. https://webdesk.jsa.or.jp/books/W11M0090/index/?bunsyo_id=JIS+T+0922%3A2007Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Sandra Bardot, Marcos Serrano, Bernard Oriola, and Christophe Jouffrais. 2017. Identifying How Visually Impaired People Explore Raised-Line Diagrams to Improve the Design of Touch Interfaces. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Denver, Colorado, USA) (CHI ’17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 550–555. https://doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3025582Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Graham Black. 2012. The engaging museum: Developing museums for visitor involvement. Routledge, London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Anke M Brock, Philippe Truillet, Bernard Oriola, Delphine Picard, and Christophe Jouffrais. 2015. Interactivity improves usability of geographic maps for visually impaired people. Human–Computer Interaction 30, 2 (2015), 156–194.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Kangwei Chen, Victoria Plaza-Leiva, Byung-Cheol Min, Aaron Steinfeld, and Mary Bernardine Dias. 2016. NavCue: Context Immersive Navigation Assistance for Blind Travelers. In The Eleventh ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human Robot Interaction (Christchurch, New Zealand) (HRI ’16). IEEE Press, 559.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Anne Chick 2017. Co-creating an accessible, multisensory exhibition with the National Centre for Craft & Design and blind and partially sighted participants. REDO Cumulus Conference Proceedings(2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Matthew Cock, Molly Bretton, Anna Fineman, Richard France, Claire Madge, and Melanie Sharpe. 2018. State of Museum Access 2018: does your museum website welcome and inform disabled visitors?http://vocaleyes.co.uk/state-of-museum-access-2018/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Eugenia Devile and Elisabeth Kastenholz. 2018. Accessible tourism experiences: the voice of people with visual disabilities. Journal of Policy Research in Tourism, Leisure and Events 10, 3(2018), 265–285.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Jocelyn Dodd, Richard Sandell, 2001. Including museums: perspectives on museums, galleries and social inclusion. University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Fatma Faheem and Mohammad Irfan. 2021. Museums for Equality: Diversity and Inclusion–A New Concept of Future Museums. IAR Journal of Humanities and Cultural Studies 2, 1 (2021), 12–13.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Natália Filová, Lea Rollová, and Zuzana Čerešňová. 2022. Route options in inclusive museums: Case studies from Central Europe. Architecture Papers of the Faculty of Architecture and Design STU 27, 1(2022), 12–24.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Uttara Ghodke, Lena Yusim, Sowmya Somanath, and Peter Coppin. 2019. The Cross-Sensory Globe: Participatory Design of a 3D Audio-Tactile Globe Prototype for Blind and Low-Vision Users to Learn Geography. In Proceedings of the 2019 on Designing Interactive Systems Conference (San Diego, CA, USA) (DIS ’19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 399–412. https://doi.org/10.1145/3322276.3323686Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Stéphanie Giraud, Anke M Brock, Marc J-M Macé, and Christophe Jouffrais. 2017. Map learning with a 3D printed interactive small-scale model: Improvement of space and text memorization in visually impaired students. Frontiers in psychology 8 (2017), 930.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Timo Götzelmann. 2016. LucentMaps: 3D Printed Audiovisual Tactile Maps for Blind and Visually Impaired People. In Proceedings of the 18th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (Reno, Nevada, USA) (ASSETS ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 81–90. https://doi.org/10.1145/2982142.2982163Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Jaume Gual, Marina Puyuelo, and Joaquim Lloveras. 2014. Three-dimensional tactile symbols produced by 3D Printing: Improving the process of memorizing a tactile map key. British Journal of Visual Impairment 32, 3 (2014), 263–278.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Jaume Gual, Marina Puyuelo, and Joaquim Lloveras. 2015. The effect of volumetric (3D) tactile symbols within inclusive tactile maps. Applied Ergonomics 48(2015), 1–10.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Jaume Gual, Marina Puyuelo, Joaquim Lloveras, 2011. Universal design and visual impairment: Tactile products for heritage access. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 11). Lyngby/Copenhagen, Denmark, 155–164.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Jaume Gual, Marina Puyuelo, Joaquim Lloverás, and Lola Merino. 2012. Visual impairment and urban orientation. Pilot study with tactile maps produced through 3D printing. Psyecology 3, 2 (2012), 239–250.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. João Guerreiro, Dragan Ahmetovic, Kris M. Kitani, and Chieko Asakawa. 2017. Virtual Navigation for Blind People: Building Sequential Representations of the Real-World. In Proceedings of the 19th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (Baltimore, Maryland, USA) (ASSETS ’17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 280–289. https://doi.org/10.1145/3132525.3132545Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Kozue Handa, Hitoshi Dairoku, and Yoshiko Toriyama. 2010. Investigation of priority needs in terms of museum service accessibility for visually impaired visitors. British journal of visual impairment 28, 3 (2010), 221–234.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Kevin Hetherington. 2000. Museums and the visually impaired: the spatial politics of access. The Sociological Review 48, 3 (2000), 444–463.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Leona Holloway, Kim Marriott, and Matthew Butler. 2018. Accessible Maps for the Blind: Comparing 3D Printed Models with Tactile Graphics. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Montreal QC, Canada) (CHI ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3173772Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Leona Holloway, Kim Marriott, Matthew Butler, and Samuel Reinders. 2019. 3D Printed Maps and Icons for Inclusion: Testing in the Wild by People Who Are Blind or Have Low Vision. In The 21st International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (Pittsburgh, PA, USA) (ASSETS ’19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 183–195. https://doi.org/10.1145/3308561.3353790Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Eilean Hooper-Greenhill, Richard Sandell, Theano Moussouri, Helen O’Riain, 2000. Museums and social inclusion: The GLLAM report. University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Sulaiman Khan, Shah Nazir, and Habib Ullah Khan. 2021. Analysis of Navigation Assistants for Blind and Visually Impaired People: A Systematic Review. IEEE Access 9(2021), 26712–26734. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3052415Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Barbara Leporini, Valentina Rossetti, Francesco Furfari, Susanna Pelagatti, and Andrea Quarta. 2020. Design Guidelines for an Interactive 3D Model as a Supporting Tool for Exploring a Cultural Site by Visually Impaired and Sighted People. ACM Trans. Access. Comput. 13, 3, Article 9 (aug 2020), 39 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3399679Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Nina Levent and Christines Reich. 2012. How Can My Museum Help Visitors With Vision Loss?Museum. American Association of Museums July-August (2012), 21–22. http://ww2.aam-us.org/docs/default-source/museum/visitors-with-vision-loss.pdf?sfvrsn=0Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Georgia Lindsay. 2020. Contemporary Museum Architecture and Design. Routledge, New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Marianne Loo-Morrey. 2005. Tactile Paving Survey. https://www.hse.gov.uk/research/hsl_pdf/2005/hsl0507.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. ICOM The International Council of Museums. 2020. International Museum Day 2020 - Museums for Equality: Diversity and Inclusion. https://imd.icom.museum/past-editions/2020-museums-for-equality-diversity-and-inclusion/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. ICOM The International Council of Museums. 2022. International Museum Day 2022: The Power of Museums. https://imd.icom.museum/international-museum-day-2022-the-power-of-museums/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. The Braille Authority of North America. 2010. Guidelines and Standards for Tactile Graphics. http://www.brailleauthority.org/tg/web-manual/index.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Round Table on Information Access for People with Print Disabilities Inc. 2005. Guidelines on Conveying Visual Information. https://printdisability.org/guidelines/guidelines-on-conveying-visual-information-2005/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Petros Pistofidis, George Ioannakis, Fotis Arnaoutoglou, Natasa Michailidou, Melpomeni Karta, Chairi Kiourt, George Pavlidis, Spyridon G Mouroutsos, Despoina Tsiafaki, and Anestis Koutsoudis. 2021. Composing smart museum exhibit specifications for the visually impaired. Journal of Cultural Heritage 52 (2021), 1–10.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. Jonathan Rowell and Simon Ongar. 2003. The world of touch: an international survey of tactile maps. Part 2: design. British Journal of Visual Impairment 21, 3 (2003), 105–110.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  39. Jonathan Rowell and Simon Ungar. 2003. The world of touch: an international survey of tactile maps. Part 1: production. British Journal of Visual Impairment 21, 3 (2003), 98–104.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  40. Jonathan Rowell and Simon Ungar. 2005. Feeling our way: tactile map user requirements-a survey. In International Cartographic Conference, La Coruna. 652–659.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Richard Sandell. 2002. Museums, society, inequality. Routledge, London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Martin Schmitz, Mohammadreza Khalilbeigi, Matthias Balwierz, Roman Lissermann, Max Mühlhäuser, and Jürgen Steimle. 2015. Capricate: A Fabrication Pipeline to Design and 3D Print Capacitive Touch Sensors for Interactive Objects. In Proceedings of the 28th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software & Technology (Charlotte, NC, USA) (UIST ’15). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 253–258. https://doi.org/10.1145/2807442.2807503Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. Jonathan Sweet. 2007. Museum architecture and visitor experience. Museum Marketing: Competing in the global marketplace (2007), 226–237.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Brandon Taylor, Anind Dey, Dan Siewiorek, and Asim Smailagic. 2016. Customizable 3D Printed Tactile Maps as Interactive Overlays. In Proceedings of the 18th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (Reno, Nevada, USA) (ASSETS ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 71–79. https://doi.org/10.1145/2982142.2982167Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. Simon Ungar. 2018. Cognitive mapping without visual experience. In Cognitive Mapping: Past Present and Future. Routledge, London, 221–248.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. Simon Ungar, Mark Blades, and Christopher Spencer. 1993. The role of tactile maps in mobility training. British Journal of Visual Impairment 11, 2 (1993), 59–61.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  47. Raša Urbas, Matej Pivar, and Urška Stankovič Elesini. 2016. Development of tactile floor plan for the blind and the visually impaired by 3D printing technique. Journal of graphic engineering and design 7, 1 (2016), 19–26.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  48. Roberto Vaz, Diamantino Freitas, and António Coelho. 2020. Blind and Visually Impaired Visitors’ Experiences in Museums: Increasing Accessibility through Assistive Technologies.International Journal of the Inclusive Museum 13, 2 (2020).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. Roberto Vaz, Diamantino Freitas, and António Coelho. 2020. Perspectives of Visually Impaired Visitors on Museums: Towards an Integrative and Multisensory Framework to Enhance the Museum Experience. In 9th International Conference on Software Development and Technologies for Enhancing Accessibility and Fighting Info-Exclusion (Online, Portugal) (DSAI 2020). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 17–21. https://doi.org/10.1145/3439231.3439272Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  50. Andreas Voigt and Bob Martens. 2006. Development of 3D tactile models for the partially sighted to facilitate spatial orientation. In 24th eCAADe Conference Proceedings. CUMINCAD.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  51. Diana Walters. 2009. Approaches in museums towards disability in the United Kingdom and the United States. Museum management and curatorship 24, 1 (2009), 29–46.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. Xi Wang, Danny Crookes, Sue-Ann Harding, and David Johnston. 2022. Stories, journeys and smart maps: an approach to universal access. Universal Access in the Information Society 21, 2 (2022), 419–435.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  53. Zheshen Wang, Baoxin Li, Terri Hedgpeth, and Teresa Haven. 2009. Instant Tactile-Audio Map: Enabling Access to Digital Maps for People with Visual Impairment. In Proceedings of the 11th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA) (Assets ’09). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 43–50. https://doi.org/10.1145/1639642.1639652Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  54. Neng-Hao Yu, Sung-Sheng Tsai, I-Chun Hsiao, Dian-Je Tsai, Meng-Han Lee, Mike Y. Chen, and Yi-Ping Hung. 2011. Clip-on Gadgets: Expanding Multi-Touch Interaction Area with Unpowered Tactile Controls. In Proceedings of the 24th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (Santa Barbara, California, USA) (UIST ’11). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 367–372. https://doi.org/10.1145/2047196.2047243Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  55. Limin Zeng, Gerhard Weber, 2011. Accessible maps for the visually impaired. In Proceedings of IFIP INTERACT 2011 Workshop on ADDW, CEUR, Vol. 792. 54–60.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. BentoMuseum: 3D and Layered Interactive Museum Map for Blind Visitors

        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
          ASSETS '22: Proceedings of the 24th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility
          October 2022
          902 pages
          ISBN:9781450392587
          DOI:10.1145/3517428

          Copyright © 2022 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 ACM 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 2022

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article
          • Research
          • Refereed limited

          Acceptance Rates

          ASSETS '22 Paper Acceptance Rate35of132submissions,27%Overall Acceptance Rate436of1,556submissions,28%

        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