Comparing Interaction Techniques to Help Blind People Explore Maps on Small Tactile Devices

Abstract

Exploring geographic maps on touchscreens is a difficult task in the absence of vision as those devices miss tactile cues. Prior research has therefore introduced non-visual interaction techniques designed to allow visually impaired people to explore spatial configurations on tactile devices. In this paper, we present a study in which six blind and six blindfolded sighted participants evaluated three of those interaction techniques compared to a screen reader condition. We observed that techniques providing guidance result in a higher user satisfaction and more efficient exploration. Adding a grid-like structure improved the estimation of distances. None of the interaction techniques improved the reconstruction of the spatial configurations. The results of this study allow improving the design of non-visual interaction techniques that support a better exploration and memorization of maps in the absence of vision.

Cognitive map formation through haptic and visual exploration of tactile city-like maps

“…We show that presenting a fairly simple environment haptically allows for the formation of a cognitive map that is comparable to a cognitive map formed using visual and haptic information combined. Such a mental representation of the map could support navigation in the real environment, and our results are in line with research that shows the effectiveness of tactile maps to support blind people in wayfinding and orientation 20 , 23 , 25 – 30 , 36 , 37 . To construct a tactile map, one should take the complexity into account, as well as how much and what kind of information is presented, since we do find some differences between map A, B and C. To be able to give indications about cognitive maps and navigation based on haptic information in persons who are actually visually impaired, a logical next step in this research would be to perform a similar experiment with visually impaired participants.…”

Cognitive Mapping Without Vision: Comparing Wayfinding Performance After Learning From Digital Touchscreen-Based Multimodal Maps vs. Embossed Tactile Overlays

“…For instance, the development of cognitive maps was more accurate (and less effortful) when the digital maps were learned by 12 BVI users with a combination of vibration and audio feedback vs. only audio information (Yatani et al, 2012). Similar empirical/preference benefits for combined haptic and audio multimodal touchscreen interfaces vs. their unimodal analogs have been shown for map learning with 14 BVI participants on comprehension of indoor layouts (Adams et al, 2015), with 6 BVI and six blindfolded-sighted user's on map recreation tasks after learning the relation between three landmarks on a tablet-based digital map (Simonnet et al, 2019) and with map learning by 12 BVI users via a small touchscreenbased watch interface (Bardot et al, 2016). In aggregate, these studies demonstrate the value of using multimodal information for learning maps via the touchscreen, and germane to the current study, show that the use of vibrotactile information is particularly important for supporting cognitive map development and is most preferred as a mapping interface by users.…”

Tactile cartography in the digital age: A review and research agenda

“…The authors also observed that users were not entirely happy with the tactile experience of their touchplates, a result also noted in Brock et al (2010) and Taylor et al (2016). However, audio integration with touchplates has shown promise, such as those that use TTS for reading labels and directions (Götzelmann, 2016;Shi et al, 2020;Simonnet et al, 2019).…”

“…There is also an important, steady beat of research on tactile map usability and cognition that does not necessarily involve digital or interactive maps, investigating topics including -but not limited to -symbolization (Lee, 2019;Rahardjo et al, 2019), estimating spatial relationships (Hagedorn, 2012;Simonnet et al, 2019), tactual perception (Bardot et al, 2014;Brock et al, 2012;Jansson and Monaci, 2003;Morash et al, 2014), representations of scale (Rastogi et al, 2013;Yayla, 2009), and the comparison of tactile maps to verbal descriptions (Habel et al, 2010;Koustriava et al, 2016). This research is certainly crucial for deepening our understanding of how tactile maps work and are used.…”