Understanding the Power of Control in Autonomous Vehicles for People with Vision Impairment
Abstract
Autonomy and control are important themes in design for people with disabilities. With the rise in research in autonomous vehicle design, we investigate perceived differences in control for people with vision impairments in the use of semi- and fully autonomous vehicles. We conducted focus groups with 15 people with vision impairments. Each focus group included a design component asking participants to design voice-based and tactile solutions to problems identified by the group. We contribute a new perspective of independence in the context of control. We discuss the importance of driving for blind and low vision people, describe differences in perceptions of autonomous vehicles based on level of autonomy, and the use of assistive technology in vehicle operation and information gathering. Our findings guide the design of accessible autonomous transportation systems and existing navigation and orientation systems for people with vision impairments.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
The majority of accessibility focused BLV projects have primarily concerned the in-vehicle stage of AV travel.
“Although the majority of accessibility focused BLV projects have primarily concerned the in-vehicle stage of AV travel [2, 3, 7, 10, 12, 16, 17]”
From Get In Touch with Your Seat: Accessible Seat Localization for Blind and Low Vision Travelers in Autonomous Shuttles (2026) · cites this paper as [2]
Prior work demonstrates the importance of BLV user control in AVs.
“This aligns with prior work demonstrating the importance of BLV user control in AVs [2, 4].”
From Get In Touch with Your Seat: Accessible Seat Localization for Blind and Low Vision Travelers in Autonomous Shuttles (2026) · cites this paper as [2]
Cites
Learned helplessness: Theory and evidence
Maier, S. F., & Seligman, M. E. (1976) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: General · doi:10.1037/0096-3445.105.1.3 · Cited by 2,494 · see citing works
Kane, S. K., Jayant, C., Wobbrock, J. O., & Ladner, R. E. (2009) · Proceedings of the 11th international ACM SIGACCESS conference on Computers and accessibility · doi:10.1145/1639642.1639663 · Cited by 383 · see citing works
PassChords: secure multi-touch authentication for blind people
Azenkot, S., Rector, K., Ladner, R., & Wobbrock, J. (2012) · Proceedings of the 14th international ACM SIGACCESS conference on Computers and accessibility · doi:10.1145/2384916.2384945 · Cited by 116 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Interfaces including tactile and/or audio feedback have been used in studies with older adults operating vehicles [43] and people with vision impairments using mobile devices for public transportation or walking navigation [3,57].”
BackgroundxPress: Rethinking Design for Aging and Accessibility through an IVR Blogging System
Brewer, R. N., & Piper, A. M. (2017) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3139354 · Cited by 37 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Considerations for AI fairness for people with disabilities
Trewin, S., Basson, S., Muller, M., Branham, S., Treviranus, J., Gruen, D., Hebert, D., Lyckowski, N., & Manser, E. (2019) · AI Matters · doi:10.1145/3362077.3362086 · Cited by 143 · see citing works
Kameswaran, V., J. Fiannaca, A., Kneisel, M., Karlson, A., Cutrell, E., & Ringel Morris, M. (2020) · Proceedings of the 22nd International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility · doi:10.1145/3373625.3416995 · Cited by 33 · see citing works
Self-citationAccessible Maps for the Future of Inclusive Ridesharing
Fink, P. D. S., Milne, H., Caccese, A., Alsamsam, M., Loranger, J., Colley, M., & Giudice, N. A. (2024) · Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications · doi:10.1145/3640792.3675736 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
“…ride, participants were asked three Likert-style survey questions (1-5, strongly disagree to strongly agree) that our team generated based on results from the existing accessibility and ridesharing literature, including estimated arrival time [36], pick-up locations [5], and vehicle behavior [25].”
MethodD. S. Fink, P., R Brown, J., M Movalia, R., J James, K., E Kastelein, M., Bond, J., E Andrulis, M., & A Giudice, N. (2026) · Proceedings of the Extended Abstracts of the 2026 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3772363.3798714
“Although the majority of accessibility focused BLV projects have primarily concerned the in-vehicle stage of AV travel [2, 3, 7, 10, 12, 16, 17], several recent projects have also explored solutions to challenges for other segments of the trip.”
- Authors
- Brewer, R. N., & Kameswaran, V.
- Affiliations
- University of Michigan (US)
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 20th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2018-10-08
- Pages
- 185-197
- OpenAlex
- W2896297615
- Cited by
- 72
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 4
- FWCI
- 15.80
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS) (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Center for Connected and Automated Transportation
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Assistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
- Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Digital Accessibility for Disabilities
- Keywords
- autonomous vehicles, visual impairment, blind people, low vision, perceived control, autonomy, assistive technology, speech interfaces, touch interfaces, accessible transportation, independence, user-centered design
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
