CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 54Disability Rights and RepresentationDigital Accessibility for DisabilitiesAssistive Technology in Communication and Mobility

Towards Inclusive Avatars: Disability Representation in Avatar Platforms

Open access
Mack, Kelly, Hsu, Rai Ching Ling, Monroy-Hernández, Andrés, Smith, Brian A., Liu, Fannie·2023·Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
DOI 10.1145/3544548.3581481
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Digital avatars are an important part of identity representation, but there is little work on understanding how to represent disability. We interviewed 18 people with disabilities and related identities about their experiences and preferences in representing their identities with avatars. Participants generally preferred to represent their disability identity if the context felt safe and platforms supported their expression, as it was important for feeling authentically represented. They also utilized avatars in strategic ways: as a means to signal and disclose current abilities, access needs, and to raise awareness. Some participants even found avatars to be a more accessible way to communicate than alternatives. We discuss how avatars can support disability identity representation because of their easily customizable format that is not strictly tied to reality. We conclude with design recommendations for creating platforms that better support people in representing their disability and other minoritized identities.

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 · 10.1145/3544548.3581481

Cites

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.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 54 · Cited by 54

Research works printed but not linked: 37

  1. Veronica Abebe, Gagik Amaryan, Marina Beshai, Ali Ekin Gurgen, Wendy Ho, Naaji R Hylton, Daniel Kim, Christy Lee, Carina Lewandowski, Katherine T Miller, et al. 2022. Anti-Racist HCI: notes on an emerging critical technical practice. In CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems Extended Abstracts. 1-12.
  2. Rachel Bailey, Kevin Wise, and Paul Bolls. 2009. How avatar customizability affects children's arousal and subjective presence during junk food-sponsored online video games. CyberPsychology & Behavior 12, 3 (2009), 277-283.
  3. Colin Barnes. 2019. Understanding the social model of disability: Past, present and future. In Routledge handbook of disability studies. Routledge, 14-31.
  4. Cynthia L Bennett, Cole Gleason, Morgan Klaus Scheuerman, Jeffrey P Bigham, Anhong Guo, and Alexandra To. 2021. "It's Complicated": Negotiating Accessibil- ity and (Mis) Representation in Image Descriptions of Race, Gender, and Disability. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1-19.
  5. Liam Bullingham and Ana C Vasconcelos. 2013. 'The presentation of self in the online world': Goffman and the study of online identities. Journal of information science 39, 1 (2013), 101-112.
  6. Robert Chapman. 2020. Neurodiversity, disability, wellbeing. In Neurodiversity Studies. Routledge, 57-72.
  7. David Cobley. 2018. Understanding, defining and measuring disability. In Dis- ability and International Development. Routledge, 8-28.
  8. Amanda Cullen, Kathryn Ringland, and Christine Wolf. 2018. A better world: examples of disability in Overwatch. First Person Scholar 28 (2018), 2018.
  9. Donna Z Davis and Shelby Stanovsek. 2021. The machine as an extension of the body: When identity, immersion, and interactive design serve as both resource and limitation for the disabled. Human-Machine Communication 2 (2021), 121- 135.
  10. Joan Morris DiMicco and David R Millen. 2007. Identity management: multiple presentations of self in facebook. In Proceedings of the 2007 international ACM conference on Supporting group work. 383-386.
  11. Emory James Edwards, Cella Monet Sum, and Stacy M Branham. 2020. Three tensions between personas and complex disability identities. In Extended abstracts of the 2020 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 1-9.
  12. Guo Freeman and Divine Maloney. 2021. Body, avatar, and me: The presentation and perception of self in social virtual reality. Proceedings of the ACM on Human- Computer Interaction 4, CSCW3 (2021), 1-27.
  13. Kathrin Gerling, Kieran Hicks, Michael Kalyn, Adam Evans, and Conor Line- han. 2016. Designing movement-based play with young people using powered wheelchairs. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 4447-4458.
  14. Sara Goering. 2015. Rethinking disability: the social model of disability and chronic disease. Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine 8, 2 (2015), 134-138.
  15. April Herndon. 2002. Disparate but disabled: Fat embodiment and disability studies. Nwsa Journal (2002), 120-137.
  16. Tanner Higgin. 2009. Blackless fantasy: The disappearance of race in massively multiplayer online role-playing games. Games and Culture 4, 1 (2009), 3-26.
  17. Emory James Edwards, Kyle Lewis Polster, Isabel Tuason, Emily Blank, Michael Gilbert, and Stacy Branham. 2021. "That's in the eye of the beholder": Layers of Interpretation in Image Descriptions for Fictional Representations of People with Disabilities. In The 23rd International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility. 1-14.
  18. Seung-A Annie Jin. 2009. Avatars mirroring the actual self versus projecting the ideal self: The effects of self-priming on interactivity and immersion in an exergame, Wii Fit. CyberPsychology & Behavior 12, 6 (2009), 761-765.
  19. Seung-A Annie Jin and Namkee Park. 2009. Parasocial interaction with my avatar: Effects of interdependent self-construal and the mediating role of self-presence in an avatar-based console game, Wii. CyberPsychology & Behavior 12, 6 (2009), 723-727.
  20. Yasmin B Kafai, Melissa S Cook, and Deborah A Fields. 2010. "Blacks Deserve Bodies Too!": Design and Discussion About Diversity and Race in a Tween Virtual World. Games and Culture 5, 1 (2010), 43-63.
  21. Yasmin B Kafai, Deborah A Fields, and Melissa S Cook. 2010. Your second selves: Player-designed avatars. Games and culture 5, 1 (2010), 23-42.
  22. Nathan Kai-Cheong Chan and Allison C Gillick. 2009. Fatness as a disability: questions of personal and group identity. Disability & Society 24, 2 (2009), 231- 243.
  23. Katariina Kyrölä. 2021. Fat in the Media. In The Routledge International Handbook of Fat Studies. Routledge, 105-116.
  24. David J Leonard. 2006. Not a hater, just keepin'it real: The importance of race-and gender-based game studies. Games and culture 1, 1 (2006), 83-88.
  25. Kelly Mack, Emma McDonnell, Dhruv Jain, Lucy Lu Wang, Jon E. Froehlich, and Leah Findlater. 2021. What do we mean by "accessibility research"? A literature survey of accessibility papers in CHI and ASSETS from 1994 to 2019. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1-18.
  26. Victoria McArthur and Jennifer Jenson. 2014. E is for everyone? Best practices for the socially inclusive design of avatar creation interfaces. In Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Interactive Entertainment. 1-8.
  27. Victoria McArthur, Robert John Teather, and Jennifer Jenson. 2015. The avatar affordances framework: mapping affordances and design trends in character creation interfaces. In Proceedings of the 2015 annual symposium on Computer- Human Interaction in Play. 231-240.
  28. Helen Morgan, Amanda O'donovan, Renita Almeida, Ashleigh Lin, and Yael Perry. 2020. The Role of the Avatar in Gaming for Trans and Gender Diverse Young People. International journal of environmental research and public health 17, 22 (2020), 8617.
  29. Martez Mott, Edward Cutrell, Mar Gonzalez Franco, Christian Holz, Eyal Ofek, Richard Stoakley, and Meredith Ringel Morris. 2019. Accessible by design: An opportunity for virtual reality. In 2019 IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality Adjunct (ISMAR-Adjunct). IEEE, 451-454.
  30. Kristine L Nowak and Jesse Fox. 2018. Avatars and computer-mediated commu- nication: a review of the definitions, uses, and effects of digital representations. Review of Communication Research 6 (2018), 30-53.
  31. Tyler Pace. 2008. Can an orc catch a cab in stormwind? Cybertype preference in the World of Warcraft character creation interface. In CHI'08 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 2493-2502.
  32. Tyler Pace, Aaron Houssian, and Victoria McArthur. 2009. Are socially exclusive values embedded in the avatar creation interfaces of MMORPGs? Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society (2009).
  33. Cale J. Passmore and Regan Mandryk. 2018. An About Face: Diverse Represen- tation in Games. In Proceedings of the 2018 Annual Symposium on Computer- Human Interaction in Play (Melbourne, VIC, Australia) (CHI PLAY '18). As- sociation for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 365-380. https: //doi.org/10.1145/3242671.3242711 · DOI
  34. Tom Shakespeare et al. 2006. The social model of disability. The disability studies reader 2 (2006), 197-204.
  35. Sherry Turkle. 1994. Constructions and reconstructions of self in virtual reality: Playing in the MUDs. Mind, Culture, and Activity 1, 3 (1994), 158-167.
  36. Susan Wendell. 2001. Unhealthy disabled: Treating chronic illnesses as disabilities. Hypatia 16, 4 (2001), 17-33.
  37. Kexin Zhang, Elmira Deldari, Zhicong Lu, Yaxing Yao, and Yuhang Zhao. 2022. "It's Just Part of Me:" Understanding Avatar Diversity and Self-Presentation of People with Disabilities in Social Virtual Reality (ASSETS '22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 4, 16 pages. https: //doi.org/10.1145/3517428.3544829 · DOI · Paper page

Authors
Mack, K., Hsu, R. C. L., Monroy-Hernández, A., Smith, B. A., & Liu, F.
Affiliations
  • University of Washington (US)
  • Snap (United States) (US)
  • Snap, United States and Computer Science, Princeton University, United States
  • JPMorgan Chase & Co (United States) (US)
ORCID
Venue
Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
Publisher
ACM
Published
2023-04-19
Pages
1-13
DOI
10.1145/3544548.3581481
OpenAlex
W4319323801
Cited by
54
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 7 · 2018: 1
FWCI
13.28
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Funders
Snap Inc.
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Disability Rights and Representation
  • Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Digital Accessibility for Disabilities
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Assistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
Keywords
avatars, disability representation, disability identity, identity expression, accessibility, minoritized identities, inclusive 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