Improving Assistive Technologies for the Visually Impaired: Minimizing the Side Effects of Magnification Products

Abstract

This study focused on determining and minimizing the effects of motion sickness caused by feelings of vection during the use of magnification assistive technology (AT) products by the visually impaired. A prototype was developed that minimized hypothesized causes of vection in current magnification products. Data were collected from respondents to determine their current use, satisfaction and sickness levels when using magnification AT products. Participants then interacted with the prototype and similar data were collected. Results indicated that the prototype significantly reduced feelings of sickness and vection as compared to conventional AT magnification devices. Further research is warranted on other aspects of such devices that may contribute to adverse side effects.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

AzTap Library. (2001). The Technology-Related Assistance for Individuals with Disabilities Act. Retrieved Nov 13, 2001 from http://www.nau.edu/ihd/aztap/techact.html

Brandt

Wist

E. R.

Dichgans

(1975). Foreground and background in dynamic spatial orientation. Perception & Psychophysics, 17(5), 497–503.

Delorme

Martin

(1986). Roles of retinal periphery and depth periphery in linear vection and visual control of standing in humans. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 40(2), 176–187.

Demers

Weiss-Lambrou

Ska

(1996). Development of the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology. Assistive Technology, 8(1), 3–13.

Glinert

E. P.

York

B. W.

(1992). Computers and people with disabilities. Communications of ACM, 35(5), 32–35.

Hettinger

L. J.

(2002). Illusory self-motion in virtual environments. In Stanney

K. M.

Handbook of Virtual Environments: Design, Implementation, and Application (pp. 471–491). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Lighthouse International. (2001). Introduction to adaptive computer technology. Retrieved September, 2001 from http://www.lighthouse.org/resources_adaptive_tech.htm

Newell

A. F.

(1995). Extra-ordinary human-computer interaction. In Edwards

A. D. N.

Extra-ordinary Human-computer Interaction: Interfaces for Users with Disabilities (pp. 3–18). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Newell

A. F.

Gregor

(1997). Human computer interfaces for people with disabilities. In Helander

et al Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction, 2nd revised edition (pp. 813–823) New York: Elsevier.

10.

Ohmi

Howard

J. P.

(1988). Effect of stationary objects on illusory forward self-motion induced by a looming display. Perception, 17(7), 5–12.

11.

Ohmi

Howard

I. P.

Landolt

J. P.

(1987). Circular vection as a function of foreground – background relationships. Perception, 16(1), 17–22.

12.

Palmisano

Gillam

(1998). Stimulus eccentricity and spatial frequency interact to determine circular vection. Perception, 27(9), 1067–1077.

13.

Pavard

Berthoz

Lestienne

(1976). Role of peripheral vision in linear motion detection (linear vection). [Abstract only]. Travail Humain, 39(1), 115.

14.

Previc

F. H.

Donnelly

(1993). The effects of visual depth and eccentricity on manual bias, induced motion, and vection. Perception, 22(8), 929–945.

15.

Reason

J. T.

Brand

J. J.

(1975). Motion sickness. London: Academic Press.

16.

Telford

Spratley

Frost

B. J.

(1992). Linear vection in the central visual field facilitated by kinetic depth cues. Perception, 21(3), 337–349.

17.

U.S. Census Bureau. (1990). National Health Interview Survey on Assistive Devices (NHIS-AD), Washington, DC.