Cited by 123Tactile and Sensory InteractionsDigital Accessibility for DisabilitiesAssistive Technology in Communication and Mobility

Blind people and mobile touch-based text-entry: acknowledging the need for different flavors

Oliveira, João, Guerreiro, Tiago, Nicolau, Hugo, Jorge, Joaquim, Gonçalves, Daniel·2011·The proceedings of the 13th international ACM SIGACCESS conference on Computers and accessibility

Abstract

The emergence of touch-based mobile devices brought fresh and exciting possibilities. These came at the cost of a considerable number of novel challenges. They are particularly apparent with the blind population, as these devices lack tactile cues and are extremely visually demanding. Existing solutions resort to assistive screen reading software to compensate the lack of sight, still not all the information reaches the blind user. Good spatial ability is still required to have notion of the device and its interface, as well as the need to memorize buttons' position on screen. These abilities, as many other individual attributes as age, age of blindness onset or tactile sensibility are often forgotten, as the blind population is presented with the same methods ignoring capabilities and needs. Herein, we present a study with 13 blind people consisting of a touch screen text-entry task with four different methods. Results show that different capability levels have significant impact on performance and that this impact is related with the different methods' demands. These variances acknowledge the need of accounting for individual characteristics and giving space for difference, towards inclusive design.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/2049536.2049569

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Individual attributes and abilities have a significant impact on learning different text entry methods and on their performance, but so do previous experiences and technical aptitudes of users.

    “Individual attributes and abilities have a significant impact on learning different text entry methods and on their performance [12], but so do previous experiences and technical aptitudes of users.”
  • Most work on non-visual text-entry for people with visual impairments has focused on comparison of input techniques reporting performance measures such as accuracy and speed.

    “Most work on non-visual text-entry for people with visual impairments has focused on the comparison of input techniques reporting on performance measures, such as accuracy and speed.”

    From Typing Performance of Blind Users (2015) · cites this paper as [19]

  • Text-entry rates are much slower for visually impaired users than for sighted users.

    “While the visual layout of the QWERTY keyboard is identical to that presented to sighted users, the text-entry rates are much slower for visually impaired users [19].”

    From Typing Performance of Blind Users (2015) · cites this paper as [19]

  • Non-visual input is slow and error prone, especially for novice users.

    “While researchers have been able to establish that non-visual input is slow and error prone, there is little understanding on how to improve it.”

    From Typing Performance of Blind Users (2015) · cites this paper as [19]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Oliveira, J., Guerreiro, T., Nicolau, H., Jorge, J., & Gonçalves, D.
Affiliations
Instituto de Engenharia de Sistemas e Computadores Investigação e Desenvolvimento (PT)
Venue
The proceedings of the 13th international ACM SIGACCESS conference on Computers and accessibility
Publisher
ACM
Published
2011-10-24
Pages
179-186
OpenAlex
W2123382439
Cited by
123
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 7
FWCI
20.74
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS) (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Tactile and Sensory Interactions
  • Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Digital Accessibility for Disabilities
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Assistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
Keywords
blind users, mobile devices, assistive technology, screen readers, tactile cues, spatial ability, tactile sensitivity, individual differences, inclusive design, accessibility

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review