A Critical Examination of Virtual Reality Technology in the Context of the Minority Body

Abstract

Virtual Reality (VR) holds the promise of immersing people in virtual worlds. However, initial work on the relationship between VR and disability suggests that VR is a body-centric technology that poses barriers for disabled users. We supplement this work with a theoretical analysis of immersive VR through the lens of Surrogate Body theory, a concept from media theory for the structured examination of interactive media in use. Leveraging Critical Disability Studies, particularly the theory of the Minority Body, we explore the assumptions about bodies inherent in VR, and we reflect on implications of these assumptions when disabled people engage with the technology. Our findings show that VR is an inherently ableist technology that assumes a 'corporeal standard' (i.e., an 'ideal', non-disabled human body), and fails to adequately accommodate disabled people. We conclude with implications for HCI research on VR, and discuss design approaches that foster inclusive technology development. CCS CONCEPTS• Human-centered computing → Accessibility theory, concepts and paradigms; Virtual reality.

Two-In-One: A Design Space for Mapping Unimanual Input into Bimanual Interactions in VR for Users with Limited Movement

“…In their critical examination of VR technology, Gerling and Spiel described how the level of bodily involvement places a heavy emphasis on the movements of various body parts (e.g., head, arms, hands, torso, etc. ), which can present barriers to people with physical disabilities [Gerling and Spiel, 2021]. Gerling and Spiel also described how the actions lent during interactions with VR systems can pose numerous access barriers, such as fatigue from extended use [Gerling and Spiel, 2021].…”

“…), which can present barriers to people with physical disabilities [Gerling and Spiel, 2021]. Gerling and Spiel also described how the actions lent during interactions with VR systems can pose numerous access barriers, such as fatigue from extended use [Gerling and Spiel, 2021]. Franz et al addressed one aspect of bodily involvement the requirement that users rotate their heads or bodies to view a virtual scene by developing Nearmi, a framework for designing techniques that allow people with limited mobility to identify and orient to points of interests in virtual environments [Franz et al, 2021].…”

“…This style of interaction is in sharp contrast to desktop, mobile, and console gaming systems, where users employ an array of swipes, taps, button presses, and mouse movements to control virtual content. The degree of bodily involvement [Gerling et al, 2021] associated with VR provides a sense of immersion [Ahuja et al, 2021] not found in traditional computing platforms that rely on 2D input.…”

“…Interactions in VR, as with interactions in all interactive technologies, presume users possess certain abilities, making it difficult or impossible for users whose abilities do not match the ability-assumptions [Wobbrock et al, 2011] embedded in the design of VR devices and applications to fully use the technology. Recently, researchers have investigated the accessibility or lack thereof of VR for people with physical disabilities and found significant accessibility barriers that can prevent participation [Gerling et al, 2020;Gerling and Spiel, 2021;Mott, 2020]. Some barriers, such as inaccessible buttons on VR controllers [Gerling et al 2020;Mott, 2020], are common nuisances regularly encountered by people with physical disabilities, while other barriers are endemic to the full-body gestural nature of VR interaction.…”

Transreal tracing: Queer-feminist speculations on disabled technologies

“…Disability is not a biological given; like gender, it is socially constructed from biological reality’ (Wendell, 1989: 104). Boundaries drawn along gender are as artificial as those drawn along dis/ability (Goodley, 2014) and these boundaries are fundamentally exertions of power.…”