A television viewing experiment—preceded and followed by interviews about attitudes, usual television viewing patterns and demographics—was conducted with 111 legally blind adults who were convened in groups. The research examined the impact of watching television science programs with and without audio description. The experiment showed that respondents gained and retained more information from watching programs with description. Respondents reported that description makes programs more enjoyable, interesting, and informative; and that they are more comfortable talking with sighted people about programs that had been described. The positive impact of added description was greater for the program with less narration in its original format.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AUDETEL. (1995). RNIB's Bridget Pettitt reports on the viewer reaction research. European AUDETEL Project Newsletter.London: Royal National Institute for the Blind.
2.
AUDETEL. (1996). AUDETEL—What next? European AUDETEL Project Newsletter.London: Royal National Institute for the Blind.
3.
AUDETEL. (1997). Audio description in Germany. European AUDETEL Project Newsletter.London: Royal National Institute for the Blind.
CarmichaelA., & RabbittP. M. A. (1993a). Assessing audio quality for an elderly population: The AUDETEL Project Deliverable 3, Part 2 of Final Report of the Audetel Pilot Phase.Brussels: Commission of European Communities Directorate General XIII.
6.
CarmichaelA., & RabbittP.M.A. (1993b). Audio description of television for the visually disabled elderly: Assessment of the effect of audio description of elderly people's comprehension and memory for a television program. Vol. 2: The AUDETEL Project Deliverable 15, Part 2 of Final Report of the Audetel Pilot Phase.Brussels: Commission of European Communities Directorate General XIII.
7.
CarmichaelA., & RabbittP. M. A. (1993c). Survey of visually impaired people's behaviour and attitudes towards television and their aspirations for audio description (AUDETEL Project Deliverable 18, Part 2 of Final Report). London: Age and Cognitive Performance Research Centre.
8.
CroninB. J., & KingS. R. (1990). The development of the descriptive video service. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 84, 503–506.
EllisF. (1991). A picture is worth a thousand words for blind and visually impaired persons too!New York: American Foundation for the Blind.
11.
EverettL. A. (1994). What is DVS. Paper presented at OSERS Technology Conference, Rochester, NY.
12.
FrazierG., & Coutinho-JohnsonI. (1995). The effectiveness of audio description in providing access to educational AV media for blind and visually impaired students in high school.San Francisco: AudioVision.
13.
KatzA., & TurcotteJ. (1993). Measurement of comprehension changes in television viewing of visually impaired persons using descriptive video study (Research report). Boston: New England College of Optometry.
14.
KuhnD. (1992). The use of descriptive video in science programming study (Research report). Boston: WGBH Educational Foundation.
15.
KuhnD., & KirchnerC. (1992). Viewing habits and interests in science programming of the blind and visually impaired television audience (Research report). Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.
16.
McKivraganG. (1995). Potential among the general population.London: AUDETEL.
17.
MiersJ. (1998). Audio description: Seeing theater with your ears. Paper presented at the First Annual National Conference on Audio Description, Washington, DC.
18.
OrneM. T. (1962). On the social psychology of the psychological experiment: With particular reference to demand characteristics and their implications. American Psychologist, 17, 776–783.
19.
PackerJ. (1995). Psychosocial benefits of accessible television for blind/visually impaired persons. Paper presented at the American Psychological Association, New York. Quoted in the American Foundation for the Blind. (1997). Project to Conduct Research on Described Video's Audience and Methods of Distribution, Volume 2, Appendix J. New York, NY: American Foundation for the Blind.
20.
PackerJ., & KirchnerC. (1997). Who's watching? A profile of the blind and visually impaired audience for television and video.New York: American Foundation for the Blind.
21.
PeliE., FineE. M., & LabiancaA. T. (1996). Evaluating information provided by audio description. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 90, 378–385.
22.
RabbittP. M. A., & CarmichaelA. (1994). Designing communications and information-handling systems for elderly and disabled users. In SnelJ. & CremetR. (Eds.), Work and aging: A European perspective (pp. 173–196). London: Taylor & Francis.
SchmeidlerE., & KirchnerC. (1996). Adding audio description to television science programs: Impact on legally blind viewers (Final report of Grant ESI-9253447, National Science Foundation). New York: American Foundation for the Blind.
25.
SnyderJ. (1997). AD for dance, math—and more!Available on internet listserv: <audiodescl@lists.acs.ohio-state.edu>.
26.
VivianM. (1992). From this world to another. The New Beacon: The Journal of Blind Welfare, 76, 393.
