Cited by 69Assistive Technology in Communication and MobilityInnovative Human-Technology InteractionDigital Accessibility for Disabilities

Imagining Artificial Intelligence Applications with People with Visual Disabilities using Tactile Ideation

Morrison, Cecily, Cutrell, Edward, Dhareshwar, Anupama, Doherty, Kevin, Thieme, Anja, Taylor, Alex·2017·Proceedings of the 19th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility

Abstract

There has been a surge in artificial intelligence (AI) technologies co-opted by or designed for people with visual disabilities. Researchers and engineers have pushed technical boundaries in areas such as computer vision, natural language processing, location inference, and wearable computing. But what do people with visual disabilities imagine as their own technological future? To explore this question, we developed and carried out tactile ideation workshops with participants in the UK and India. Our participants generated a large and diverse set of ideas, most focusing on ways to meet needs related to social interaction. In some cases, this was a matter of recognizing people. In other cases, they wanted to be able to participate in social situations without foregrounding their disability. It was striking that this finding was consistent across UK and India despite substantial cultural and infrastructural differences. In this paper, we describe a new technique for working with people with visual disabilities to imagine new technologies that are tuned to their needs and aspirations. Based on our experience with these workshops, we provide a set of social dimensions to consider in the design of new AI technologies: social participation, social navigation, social maintenance, and social independence. We offer these social dimensions as a starting point to forefront users' social needs and desires as a more deliberate consideration for assistive technology design.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3132525.3132530

Cites

56 of 56 references verified0 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Morrison, C., Cutrell, E., Dhareshwar, A., Doherty, K., Thieme, A., & Taylor, A.
Affiliations
  • Microsoft Research (United Kingdom) (GB)
  • Microsoft (United States) (US)
  • Microsoft, Bangalore, India
Venue
Proceedings of the 19th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility
Publisher
ACM
Published
2017-10-19
Pages
81-90
OpenAlex
W2762353381
Cited by
69
References
56
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3
FWCI
9.01
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS) (publishedVersion)
  • City Research Online (City University London) (acceptedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Assistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
  • Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Digital Accessibility for Disabilities
Keywords
visual impairment, assistive technology design, artificial intelligence applications, social participation, social navigation, social maintenance, social independence, person recognition, disability visibility, inclusive design, participatory design workshops

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