A prototype of a device that relays navigational information to a person who is visually impaired using a portable tactile glove and a wearable computer and camera system was demonstrated and tested. The results of preliminary tests using the glove as a navigational device show that the paths traversed by subjects negotiating an obstacle course using the glove were not qualitatively different from the paths produced with existing wayfinding devices and that hitting probabilities, the measure of the likelihood of hitting an obstacle, are minimized from goal-directed random walks.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AckermanD. (1990). A natural history of the senses.New York: Random House.
2.
Bach-y-Rita, KaczmarekK. A., TylerM. E., & Garcia-LaraJ. (1998). Form perception with a 49-point electrotactile stimulus array on the tongue: A technical note. Journal of Rehabilitation, Research and Development, 35, 427–430.
3.
Barac-ChikojaD., & TurveyM. (1991). Perceiving aperture size by striking. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 17, 330–346.
4.
BlaschB. B., WienerW. R., & WelshR. L. (1997). Foundations of orientation and mobility (2nd ed.). New York: AFB Press.
5.
CytowicR. E. (2002). Synesthesia: A union of the senses (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
6.
DobelleW. (2000). Artificial vision for the blind by connecting a television camera to the visual cortex. ASAIO Journal, 46(1), 3–9 [Online]. Available: http://www.dobelle.com/asaio.html
7.
HarperS. (1998). Standardising electronic travel aid interaction for visually impaired people. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology.
8.
JacobsonR. D., KitchinR. M., GolledgeR. G., & BladesM. (in press). Rethinking theories of blind people's spatial abilities. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness.
9.
KaczmarekK. A., WebsterJ. G., Bach-y-RitaP., & TompkinsW. J. (1991). Electrotactile and vibrotactile displays for sensory substitution systems. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering, 38(1), 1–16.
10.
LandauB., & JackendoffR. (1993). What and where in spatial language and spatial cognition?Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 16, 217–265.
11.
MeijerP. (1992). An experimental system for auditory image representations. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering, 39, 112–121 [Online]. Available: http://www.seeingwithsound.com
12.
MoltonN., SeS., BradyJ., LeeD., & ProbertP. (1998). A stereo vision-based aid for the visually impaired. Image and Vision Computing, 76, 251–263.
13.
MoltonN., SeS., BradyM., LeeD., & ProbertP. (1999). Robotic sensing for the partially sighted. Journal of Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 26, 185–201.
14.
SekulerR., & BlakeR. (2002). Perception (4th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
15.
ShovalS., UlrichI., & BorensteinJ. (2003). Navbelt and the guide cane. IEEE Robotics and Automation Magazine, 10(1), 9–20.
16.
TanH. Z. (1996). Necessary spatial resolution for realistic tactile feeling display. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.
17.
TanH. Z., & PentlandA. (2001). Tactual displays for sensory of wearable computers and augmented reality. In BarfieldW., & CaudellT. (Eds.), Fundamentals of wearable computers and augmented reality (pp. 579–598). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
18.
ZelekJ. S., & LevineM. D. (2000). Local-global concurrent path planning and execution. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Many and Cybernetics, Part B, 30(6), 865–890.
