Accessibility and usability of self-serve kiosks for blind and partially sighted Canadians
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Approximately 7.4% of Canadians over the age of 15 report being blind or partially sighted; this impacts their daily functioning in public spaces [1]. Technological advances have included the proliferation of self-serve kiosk in many consumer settings. However, absent from discussions of community accessibility is the experiences of Canadians who are blind or partially sighted. OBJECTIVE: To better understand the experiences of this population with self-serve kiosks. METHODS: A descriptive cross-sectional study design was used to analyze survey data collected as part of a survey by Canadian National Institute for the Blind (CNIB) of people who are blind, Deafblind partially sighted about their use of self-serve kiosks. 731 participants were surveyed, representing a response rate of 3.5% across Canada. RESULTS: 64.14% of participants faced barriers in completing a task using self-serve technology. Human assistance was required to complete the tasks in most instances. 65.74% of participants reported they did not enjoy using self-serve kiosks and 60.90% of participants reported they would not continue to use self-serve kiosks in the future. CONCLUSIONS: The findings highlight a need to promote accessibility in the creation and implementation of self-serve kiosks in order to further their use and decrease exclusion of people who are blind and partially sighted.
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?
Vozza et al.'s study relied solely on survey data and did not collect in-depth qualitative insights in situ.
“However, Vozza et al.’s study relied solely on survey data and did not collect in-depth qualitative insights in situ.”
From Experiences and Perceptions of Blind and Low-Vision (BLV) People with Retail Self-Checkout Systems (2026) · cites this paper as [96]
Vozza et al. reported that self-service kiosks in grocery stores were the most frequently used by their respondents in the previous 6 months, and these systems were challenging or inaccessible.
“Vozza et al. [96], who administered a broader survey among BLV Canadian adults, reported that self-service kiosks in grocery stores were the most frequently used by their respondents in the previous 6 months, and these systems were challenging or inaccessible.”
From Experiences and Perceptions of Blind and Low-Vision (BLV) People with Retail Self-Checkout Systems (2026) · cites this paper as [96]
Vozza et al. recommended that connections with personal devices be explored for self-service kiosks to preserve privacy based on their survey work.
“Vozza et al. [96] recommended that connections with personal devices be explored for self-service kiosks to preserve privacy based on their survey work.”
From Experiences and Perceptions of Blind and Low-Vision (BLV) People with Retail Self-Checkout Systems (2026) · cites this paper as [96]
Previous work has recommended that agencies should have adequate numbers of staff on site to assist people with disabilities should they require assistance.
“Likewise, previous work has recommended that “Agencies should have adequate numbers of staff on site to assist people with disabilities should they require assistance.” [96].”
From Experiences and Perceptions of Blind and Low-Vision (BLV) People with Retail Self-Checkout Systems (2026) · cites this paper as [96]
Cites
Frier, A., Barnett, F., Devine, S., & Barker, R. (2018) · Disability and Rehabilitation · doi:10.1080/09638288.2016.1258090 · Cited by 101 · see citing works
Locke, K., McRae, L., Peaty, G., Ellis, K., & Kent, M. (2022) · Disability & Society · doi:10.1080/09687599.2021.1946678 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Experiences and Perceptions of Blind and Low-Vision (BLV) People with Retail Self-Checkout Systems
Heisey, A., Shinohara, K., & Tigwell, G. W. (2026) · ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing · doi:10.1145/3816243
“This was reinforced by findings from a 2024 study [96], which was published a couple of years after we completed our survey.”
Influential
- Authors
- Vozza, J., Knot, M., Reynolds, C., Moll, S., Durocher, E., Petrie, S., Sukhai, M., & Gewurtz, R.
- Affiliations
- McMaster University (CA)
- CNIB Foundation (CA)
- Carleton University (CA)
- University Health Network (CA)
- Queen's University (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Vozza, Jaclin
- ORCID
- Venue
- Technology and Disability
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2024-08
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 111-128
- ISSN
- 1055-4181 (ISSN-L)
- 1878-643X
- OpenAlex
- W4402191725
- Cited by
- 6
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6
- FWCI
- 12.59
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Technology and Disability (publishedVersion)
- 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
- visually impaired people, accessibility, usability, assistive technology, human support, user experience, consumer 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