Perspectives of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Viewers of Captions
Abstract
Educational rights and other rights enumerated in federal law support deaf and hard of hearing (DHH) viewers' access to captions in visual electronic media, yet uncaptioned and inadequately captioned media still exist. To determine what is satisfactory in captioned media and what could be improved to ensure access, data were gathered from focus group discussions with 20 DHH students who shared their perspectives on captions. The focus group analysis indicates that major topics of concern for DHH viewers include advocacy for captions and caption formatting preferences; the need for direct access to real-time videos, online videos, and other media; how captions influence and benefit DHH and hearing viewers; and captions' importance in public, educational, and other social/cultural spaces. The author concludes that DHH viewers' perspectives can help educators and advocates strengthen access to captions in education and society.
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?
There is a mismatch between reports of AI research and the lived experience of the DHH community.
“There seems to be a mismatch between reports of AI research and the lived experience of the DHH community [Butler 2019;Kale and Huenerfauth 2016;Kawas et al. 2016;National Deaf Center on Postsecondary Outcomes 2020].”
From Measuring the Accuracy of Automatic Speech Recognition Solutions (2023) · cites this paper as Butler 2019
Insufficient accuracy of ASR is the main issue reported by DHH individuals in related studies and by the DHH community.
“However, insuicient accuracy of ASR is the main issue reported by DHH individuals in related studies [Butler 2019;Kawas et al. 2016] and by the DHH community [Blake 2019;National Deaf Center on Postsecondary Outcomes 2020].”
From Measuring the Accuracy of Automatic Speech Recognition Solutions (2023) · cites this paper as Butler 2019
User studies can identify additional issues with ASR, such as the readability of ASR-generated text or the impact of latency in interactive conversations.
“User studies can identify additional issues with ASR, such as the readability of ASR-generated text [Butler 2019] or the impact of latency in interactive conversations [McDonnell et al. 2021].”
From Measuring the Accuracy of Automatic Speech Recognition Solutions (2023) · cites this paper as Butler 2019
Cites
Basics of Qualitative Research (3rd ed.): Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008) · SAGE · doi:10.4135/9781452230153 · Cited by 12,136 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Measuring the Accuracy of Automatic Speech Recognition Solutions
Kuhn, K., Kersken, V., Reuter, B., Egger, N., & Zimmermann, G. (2023) · ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing · doi:10.1145/3636513 · Cited by 44 · see citing works
- Authors
- Butler, J.
- Corresponding author
- Butler, Janine
- ORCID
- Butler, Janine
- Venue
- American Annals of the Deaf
- Publisher
- Project MUSE
- Published
- 2019
- Volume
- 163
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 534-553
- ISSN
- 0002-726X (ISSN-L)
- 1543-0375
- OpenAlex
- W2912779744
- Cited by
- 27
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1
- FWCI
- 4.72
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- American annals of the deaf (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Project Muse (Johns Hopkins University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Subtitles and Audiovisual Media
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Hearing Impairment and Communication
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Disability Rights and Representation
- Keywords
- captions, right to education, video accessibility, online video access, deaf students, media access
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Communications Media, Deafness, Female, Humans, Male, Reading, Self-Help Devices, Television, Focus Groups, Persons with Hearing Disabilities, Persons With Hearing Impairments, Young Adult, Education of Persons with Hearing Disabilities, Education of Hearing Disabled, Social Media
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
