Cited by 76Digital Accessibility for DisabilitiesAssistive Technology in Communication and MobilityUsability and User Interface Design

Review of Quantitative Empirical Evaluations of Technology for People with Visual Impairments

Open access
Brulé, Emeline, Tomlinson, Brianna J., Metatla, Oussama, Jouffrais, Christophe, Serrano, Marcos·2020·Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

Abstract

Addressing the needs of visually impaired people is of continued interest in Human Computer Interaction (HCI) research. Yet, one of the major challenges facing researchers in this field continues to be how to design adequate quantitative empirical evaluation for these users in HCI. In this paper, we analyse a corpus of 178 papers on technologies designed for people with visual impairments, published since 1988, and including at least one quantitative empirical evaluation (243 evaluations in total). To inform future research in this area, we provide an overview, historic trends and a unified terminology to design and report quantitative empirical evaluations. We identify open issues and propose a set of guidelines to address them. Our analysis aims to facilitate and stimulate future research on this topic.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3313831.3376749

Cites

88 of 88 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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

1 of the 89 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Brulé, E., Tomlinson, B. J., Metatla, O., Jouffrais, C., & Serrano, M.
Affiliations
  • University of Sussex, Brighton, United Kingdom
  • Georgia Institute of Technology (US)
  • University of Bristol (GB)
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
  • Université de Toulouse (FR)
Venue
Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
Publisher
ACM
Published
2020-04-21
Pages
1-14
OpenAlex
W3000122771
Cited by
76
References
89
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 3
FWCI
14.51
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (publishedVersion)
  • Sussex Research Online (University of Sussex) (submittedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EP/N00616X/2)
  • University of Sussex (RDF round 10)
  • Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR-14-CE17-0018)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Digital Accessibility for Disabilities
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Assistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
Keywords
visual impairment, assistive technology, evaluation guidelines, evaluation terminology, accessibility, research trends

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