1. BlindAid: a Virtual Exploration Tool for People who are Blind
O. Lahav, Ph.D., D. Schloerb, Ph.D., S. Kumar, and M. A. Srinivasan, Ph.D
Touch Lab, RLE, MIT
CT13, San Diego, June 2008

2. The Theory Spatial cognitive map Blinds’ exploration
Knowledge technology

3. The Theory Blinds’ cognitive map Spatial cognitive map
Blinds’ exploration
Knowledge technology
KT devices for spatial
cognitive mapping
O&M KT devices for blind

4. BlindAid System
present (NEI - R21)

5. Research Aims Design and develop a VE system for users who are blind
Conduct experiments on the usability of the VE system

6. BlindAid System - Conclusion
Avoid overload processing
Clear
Back to simple
Intuitive
Based on previous knowledge

7. The Learning Mode – User Interface

8. The Learning Mode – Researcher Interface

9. Methodology – Participants
The study included four total blind participants
41-53 years old; one participant was congenitally blind; one was female
seven criteria
No differences in initial O&M ability among participants.
Previous experience with computer applications,
No previous experience with VE or haptic devices.

10. Methodology – Research Instruments
Implementation Instruments:
Unknown simulated space (13 virtual environments)
Exploration task
Collection of the Data Instruments:
Observations
Usability questionnaire
Open interview
Modeling kit
Computer log
No differences in initial O&M ability among participants.
Previous experience with computer applications,
No previous experience with VE or haptic devices.

11. Research Studies First study - Haptic properties
Second study - Audio properties
Third study - Exploration tools
No differences in initial O&M ability among participants.
Previous experience with computer applications,
No previous experience with VE or haptic devices.

12. First Study – Haptic Properties
Which haptic feedback properties used in the VE strongly affected people who are blind?
The VE consisted of 20 objects of three types:
Different stiffness properties ‘S’ (soft-hard)
Different texture properties ‘T’ (smooth-rigid)
Different stiffness+texture properties ‘S+T’

13. First Study – Haptic Properties
Seven objects randomly chosen over six VEs

14. First Study – Haptic Properties – Result
All participants preferred objects with ‘S’ properties then ‘T’ or ‘S+T’ properties
All seven ‘S’ objects were listed as preferable
Participants preferred objects with ‘T’ properties only with large height irrespective of the type of bump

15. First Study – Haptic Properties – Result
All participants preferred a limited number of feedbacks:
Different haptic feedbacks (wall,window, and door)
Hard objects and soft objects
Designation of area or objects with safety issues

16. Second Study - Audio Properties
Which audio feedback properties used in the VE strongly affected people who are blind?
Audio type: mono, stereo, or stereo with rotation
Component’s description: short or long
Hearcon versa audio-labeled
Background sound

17. Second Study – Audio Properties
Six VEs

18. Second Study – Audio Properties – Result
Three participants chose stereo.
Stereo helped them determine which direction to go and provided more orientation to the overall space.
The stereo-rotation was an additional variable that they needed to track.
They continually needed to imagine their orientation at the time they heard the audio feedback.

19. Second Study – Audio Properties – Result
The short component’s description and hearcon need to be clear, recognizable, and short, without the need to process it.
The ability to have background sound (e.g., street noise) continuously with the stereo effect was effective and needed.
The participants did not report feeling overloaded by the audio effect or try to avoid interaction with the VE components.

20. Third Study – Exploration Tools
What are the exploration tools that maximized the participants’ exploration performance in the VE?
Move the VE workspace:
Using the arrow keys
Using the phantom button
Install and recall landmarks by:
User
Researcher
Zoom in - Zoom out (eliminate objects)

21. Third Study – Exploration Tools

22. Third Study – Exploration Tools – Result
Each of the four participants chose to use the phantom button:
Much more intuitive and a natural motion for the participants
More immediately associated with the white cane
Sense of having control over movements
Did not have to take their hands off the Phantom
Able to drag the workspace at an angle
In a complex VE the participants used mostly their own landmarks, and they usually installed two of their own.

23. BlindAid System - Conclusion
Avoid overload processing
Clear
Back to simple
Intuitive and a natural
Based on previous knowledge

24. BlindAid System - Future
To Collect spatial information in advance (Mapquest)
Integrating the system in traditional O&M trainee

25. Carroll Center for the Blind
BlindAid System – Acknowledgments
The participants
NIH / NEI - R21
Jay Desloge
Carroll Center for the Blind