A SmartDisability Framework: enhancing user interaction

Abstract

This paper introduces the SmartDisability Framework to consider mappings between disability type, Range of Movement and interaction mediums to produce technology and task recommendations to enhance user interaction. The SmartDisability conceptual model (based on the familiar disability symbol) and extracts from the initial development stage of the Framework are presented. The Framework has been populated through the knowledge obtained from state of the art literature reviews of disability classification, Range of Movement, interaction mediums, 'off-the-shelf' technologies and tasks. The Framework was augmented by requirements elicitation results and a described usability evaluation involving a simulation of the SmartATRS smartphone system to control the Automated Transport and Retrieval System (ATRS). ATRS is a technically-advanced system that enables a powered wheelchair (powerchair) to autonomously dock onto a platform lift of a vehicle using an automated tailgate and a motorised driver's seat. The usability of touch and head-based interaction methods were measured using System Usability Scale (SUS) and NASA Task Load Index (NASA TLX) and demonstrated that fingers were more usable interaction method, as head tracking required a full range of neck movement. This SmartDisability Framework is anticipated to be validated through focus groups utilising fictional personas that involve experts from the domains of healthcare, computing and occupational therapy. The framework will be routed to exploitation through the development of a smartphone or web-based application.

Trends and Gaps

“…18; Coutaz, 2010;Meixner et al, 2011), go some way to addressing these issues. In professional development internationalisation is normal practice for product delivery; and ability checklists are used to tune technology to individual abilities (Dewsbury and Ballard, 2014;Whittington and Dogan, 2016). The latter are often 'formal' in the sense that they have codified knowledge, but whereas most work on formal methods is based around relatively complex analysis of relatively simple specifications; practical development has relatively large corpora of codified knowledge, but with very simple, tick-box-style reasoning.…”

Automatic Detection of User Abilities through the SmartAbility Framework

“…This resulted in the identification of the user abilities that could be affected by physical conditions. Through the conduction of a head tracking experimentation with iOS Switch Control (Whittington and Dogan 2016b), it was established that Range of Movements (ROM) was the main determinant of technology suitability. The Framework was subsequently developed in two versions that were validated by involving the user community of people with reduced physical ability and technology and healthcare domain experts.…”

SmartAbility: Detection of reduced physical abilities through smartphone sensors

“…The framework was developed by considering analysis of physical conditions through the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health Framework (ICF) (World Health Organization 2001), where it was realised that physical conditions can affect users differently, depending on the severity. This became evident in an experimentation involving iOS Switch Control (Whittington and Dogan 2016), as the Range of Movement (ROM) of the neck was the main determinant for the suitability of Switch Control. Therefore, it was established that technology suitability is dependent on the actions that users can perform independently, i.e., user abilities.…”