Fully autonomous or “self-driving” vehicles represent a potentially transformative shift in personal mobility. Given the emerging nature of self-driving vehicle technologies, however, guidance for accessible implementation is limited. It has been suggested that the result is that much of this emerging technology is being designed in a manner that will render it largely inaccessible for persons with disabilities. Borrowing from object-oriented programming we identify common barriers to accessibility which we argue are de facto anti- patterns in the design of accessible self-driving vehicle technology. Drawing from the literature and our own studies we describe design commonalities (anti-patterns) which we argue may pose problems for persons with disabilities. We believe that this work may provide direction for designers regarding how to better support the needs of persons with a range of disabilities in the self-driving vehicle context.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AhmadB. I.LangdonP. M.GodsillS. J.HardyR.SkrypchukL.DonkorR. (2015, September). Touchscreen usability and input performance in vehicles under different road conditions: an evaluative study. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (pp. 47–54). Nottingham, United Kingdom: Association for Computing Machinery. Retrieved 2020-02-29, from http://doi.org/10.1145/2799250.2799284 doi: 10.1145/2799250.2799284
2.
AlexanderC. (1979). A pattern language: towns, buildings, construction. Oxford University Press.
3.
BayleE.BellamyR.CasadayG.EricksonT.FincherS.GrinterB.. . . ThomasJ. (1998, January). Putting it all together: towards a pattern language for interaction design: A CHI 97 workshop. ACM SIGCHI Bulletin, 30(1), 17–23. Retrieved 2020-02-25, from http://doi.org/10.1145/280571.280580 doi: 10.1145/280571.280580
4.
BorchersJ. O. (2000, January). CHI meets PLoP: an interaction patterns workshop. ACM SIGCHI Bulletin, 32(1), 9–12. Retrieved 2020-02-25, from http://doi.org/10.1145/333329.333330 doi: 10.1145/333329.333330
5.
BorchersJ. O. (2008). A Pattern Approach to Interaction Design. In GillS. (Ed.), Cognition, Communication and Interaction: Transdisciplinary Perspectives on Interactive Technology (pp. 114–131). London: Springer. Retrieved 2020-02-25, from https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84628-927-9_7 doi: 10.1007/978-1-84628-927-9_7
BrinkleyJ.DailyS. B.GilbertJ. E. (2018). A survey of visually impaired consumers about self-driving vehicles. Journal on Technology and Persons with Disabilities, 6, 274–283.
8.
BrinkleyJ.DailyS. B.GilbertJ. E. (2019a). Implementing the ATLAS Self-Driving Vehicle Voice User Interface. Journal on Technology and Persons with Disabilities, 7(16). Retrieved 2019-07-18, from http://dspace.calstate.edu/handle/10211.3/210396
9.
BrinkleyJ.DailyS. B.GilbertJ. E. (2019b). A policy proposal to support self-driving vehicle accessibility. The Journal on Technology and Persons with Disabilities, 36.
10.
BrinkleyJ.HuffE. W.PosadasB.WoodwardJ.DailyS. B.GilbertJ. E. (2020, April). Exploring the Needs, Preferences, and Concerns of Persons with Visual Impairments Regarding Autonomous Vehicles. ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing, 13(1), 1–34. Retrieved 2020-06-02, from https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3372280 doi: 10.1145/3372280
11.
BrinkleyJ.PosadasB.ShermanI.DailyS. B.GilbertJ. E. (2019, July). An Open Road Evaluation of a Self-Driving Vehicle Human–Machine Interface Designed for Visually Impaired Users. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 35(11), 1018–1032. Retrieved 2020-01-04, from https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2018.1561787 doi: 10.1080/10447318.2018.1561787
12.
BrinkleyJ.PosadasB.WoodwardJ.GilbertJ. E. (2017). Opinions and Preferences of Blind and Low Vision Consumers Regarding Self-Driving Vehicles: Results of Focus Group Discussions. In Proceedings of the 19th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (pp. 290–299). New York, NY, USA: ACM. Retrieved 2019-02-21, from http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/3132525.3132532 (event- place: Baltimore, Maryland, USA) doi: 10.1145/3132525.3132532
13.
BrownW. H.MalveauR. C.McCormickH. W.MowbrayT. J. (1998). AntiPatterns: refactoring software, architectures, and projects in crisis. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
DarrellT.NorrblomW. (2017). Human-Machine Seat Interaction: An investigation of how to design automotive seat adjustment controls (Master’s thesis, Chalmers University of Technology). Retrieved 2020-03-01, from http://publications.lib.chalmers.se/records/fulltext/249706/249706.pdf
16.
DeardenA.FinlayJ. (2006, March). Pattern Languages in HCI: A Critical Review. Human–Computer Interaction, 21(1), 49–102. Retrieved 2020-02-25, from https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327051hci2101_3 doi: 10.1207/s15327051hci2101_3
17.
GammaE.VlissidesJ.HelmR.JohnsonR. (1995). Design patterns: Elements of reusable object-oriented software. Addison-Wesley Professional.
18.
GrahamI. (2002). A pattern language for web usability. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc.
19.
GrahamR. (1999, September). Use of auditory icons as emergency warnings: evaluation within a vehicle collision avoidance application. Ergonomics, 42(9), 1233–1248. Retrieved 2020-03-02, from https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/001401399185108 doi: 10.1080/001401399185108
20.
HuffE. W.DellaMariaN.PosadasB.BrinkleyJ. (2019). Am I Too Old to Drive?: Opinions of Older Adults on Self-Driving Vehicles. In The 21st International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility - ASSETS ‘19 (pp. 500–509). Pittsburgh, PA, USA: ACM Press. Retrieved 2019-11-02, from http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=3308561.3353801 doi: 10.1145/3308561.3353801
JorlövS.BohmanK.LarssonA. (2017). Seating positions and activities in highly automated cars–a qualitative study of future automated driving scenarios. In International research conference on the biomechanics of impact.
23.
KellerP.StevensC. (2004). Meaning From Environmental Sounds: Types of Signal-Referent Relations and Their Effect on Recognizing Auditory Icons. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 10(1), 3–12. Retrieved 2020-03-02, from http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/1076-898X.10.1.3 doi: 10.1037/1076-898X.10.1.3
24.
MahemoffM.JohnstonL. (1998a, July). Pattern languages for usability: an investigation of alternative approaches. In Proceedings. 3rd Asia Pacific Computer Human Interaction (Cat. No.98EX110) (pp. 25–30). (ISSN: null) doi: 10.1109/APCHI.1998.704138
25.
MahemoffM.JohnstonL. (1998b, November). Principles for a usability- oriented pattern language. In Proceedings 1998 Australasian Computer Human Interaction Conference. OzCHI’98 (Cat. No.98EX234) (pp. 132– 139). (ISSN: null) doi: 10.1109/OZCHI.1998.732206
26.
McCallumM. C.CampbellJ. L.RichmanJ. B.BrownJ. L.WieseE. (2004, January). Speech Recognition and In-Vehicle Telematics Devices: Potential Reductions in Driver Distraction. International Journal of Speech Technology, 7(1), 25–33. Retrieved 2020-03-01, from http://link.springer.com/10.1023/B:IJST.0000004804.85334.35 doi: 10.1023/B:IJST.0000004804.85334.35
27.
McKeownD. (2005). Candidates for within-vehicle auditory displays.
National Federation of the Blind. (2016). National Federation of the Blind Resolutions for 2016. Retrieved 2017-01-16, from https://nfb.org/2016-resolution
PauwelsS. L.HübscherC.Bargas-AvilaJ. A.OpwisK. (2010, May). Building an interaction design pattern language: A case study. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(3), 452–463. Retrieved 2020-02-25, from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S0747563209001952 doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2009.12.004
33.
PittsM. J.SkrypchukL.AttridgeA.WilliamsM. A. (2014, September). Comparing the User Experience of Touchscreen Technologies in an Automotive Application. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (pp. 1–8). Seattle, WA, USA: Association for Computing Machinery. Retrieved 2020-02-29, from http://doi.org/10.1145/2667317.2667418 doi: 10.1145/2667317.2667418
