Cited by 21Tactile and Sensory InteractionsDigital Accessibility for DisabilitiesAssistive Technology in Communication and Mobility

Accessible Gesture Typing for Non-Visual Text Entry on Smartphones

Open access
Billah, Syed Masum, Ko, Yu-Jung, Ashok, Vikas, Bi, Xiaojun, Ramakrishnan, IV·2019·Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

Abstract

Gesture typing--entering a word by gliding the finger sequentially over letter to letter-- has been widely supported on smartphones for sighted users. However, this input paradigm is currently inaccessible to blind users: it is difficult to draw shape gestures on a virtual keyboard without access to key visuals. This paper describes the design of accessible gesture typing, to bring this input paradigm to blind users. To help blind users figure out key locations, the design incorporates the familiar screen-reader supported touch exploration that narrates the keys as the user drags the finger across the keyboard. The design allows users to seamlessly switch between exploration and gesture typing mode by simply lifting the finger. Continuous touch-exploration like audio feedback is provided during word shape construction that helps the user glide in the right direction of the key locations constituting the word. Exploration mode resumes once word shape is completed. Distinct earcons help distinguish gesture typing mode from touch exploration mode, and thereby avoid unintended mix-ups. A user study with 14 blind people shows 35% increment in their typing speed, indicative of the promise and potential of gesture typing technology for non-visual text entry.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3290605.3300606

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Billah, S. M., Ko, Y.-J., Ashok, V., Bi, X., & Ramakrishnan, IV
Affiliations
Stony Brook University (US)
Venue
Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
Publisher
ACM
Published
2019-05-02
Volume
2019
Pages
1-12
OpenAlex
W2941364481
Cited by
21
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1
FWCI
2.59
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Eye Institute (R01EY026621)
  • National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research
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, accessibility, smartphones, virtual keyboard, screen readers, audio feedback, earcons, typing speed, assistive technology

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