PSYC 8040
Fall 2005
Anne Adams ~ Britt Caldwell ~ Lisa Mauney ~ Jamie Weitz

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Building an Assistive Technology—The
Design Process
Identify target population
Needs analysis
Choose assistive technology to build
Task analysis/function allocation
Prototype
Evaluate prototypes
2

 Visually impaired (blind and low vision)
 Why?

Inspired by guest speakers in class

Faced with problems in everyday and work life
3

 Interviewed 2 visually impaired women
 Household tasks

Preparing meals, finding lost objects, etc.

Why?


Often defines level of independent living
Constrain domain for scope of project
 Goals

Insight into common problems

Which tasks/activities want help with
4

 Daily Issues:




Any digital appliance


Smooth surfaces
Flat keys
AC and heating control
Reading labels on frozen food, baking instructions
Setting stove
 Current solutions

Braille labels and raised dot indicators

Some over the counter (talking microwave), but $$$$
5

 Universal remote
 Control several appliances in house

Oven/stove

Microwave

Washer/dryer
 Some issues

Accidental activation (e.g., gas stove)

Might lose remote

General design issues
7

 Thermostat
 Why?

Both participants mentioned issues with the AC and heat control


Have other people set thermostat
Do not interact with the program function
 Design alternatives

Talking accessible thermostat


Universal control (e.g., wall mount display)
Software/web-based solution
8

9

10




Focus on our software/web-based thermostat idea
Pros:

Would not have to walk to thermostat





Would not need to search for control (and cannot lose it)
Could upload it to any computer
Would make use of already existing computer AT (JAWS,
Freedom Box)
Could be used by many people
Supplementary to on-the-wall unit and remote control
Cons

Need computer access


Possible internet access
Security issues
11

12

13

14

 Second round of interviews

Would visually impaired users want to use webbased thermostat?

Which functions would they like to have?

How would they label the functions?
 Interviewed 3 visually impaired women
15

Second Interview—Participant Responses
 Single column
 One page
 Keep current labels (e.g., HEAT and COOL)
 General OFF button
 General Set Temperature button
16

The Prototype–Challenges/Considerations




Different operating systems



Windows NT, XP, 2000 etc.
Macintosh
UNIX/Linux
Browser versions



Internet Explorer
Netscape
Safari

Firefox
Screen readers


JAWS
Freedom Box
How elaborate should the thermostat be?
17

 Dreamweaver

Used for basic layout
 HTML

Used to add additional labeling
 JavaScript

Used to add feedback and update information
 MS Narrator

Used to help “visualize” how website will sound for target population
18


 http://www.cc.gatech.edu/~jrweitz/ac3.1.html


Combo boxes (drop-down menus)
Program set using range of times (ex. from time x to time y set temperature to …) http://www.cc.gatech.edu/~jrweitz/ac4.1.html

Radio buttons

Program set using specific time (at time x set temperature to …)
 http://www.cc.gatech.edu/~jrweitz/ac1.html


Links to change status
Specific time (at time x set temperature to …)
19

 Trouble getting input to display as feedback
 Trouble creating adequate functionality for evaluation
 Unintended mislabeling of items
 Some errors caused by:

Unfamiliarity with (but need for) JavaScript

Testing with MS Narrator vs. JAWS for speech output
20

 Tested prototypes with subject matter experts

5 engineering psychology students


Aged 25-30
4 males and 1 female

3 visually impaired participants
 Aged 48-54
 3 females
21

 Tasks

Get current temperature

Change current temperature

Set weekday or weekend schedule
 Measures

Task completion

Errors

Problems

Comments
22




Results—Sighted Participants (First
Website with Combo Boxes)
Mostly conceptual problems


How system (heat/cool/off) and fan (on/off/auto) interact
How to set program
Pros



Clear
Uncluttered
Programming functionality
Cons






Lack of feedback (current and future settings)
Does current temperature or program take precedence?
Scrolling
Separate Saturday and Sunday schedules
Put current and set temperature in closer proximity
Confusion with Set Program and Run Program
23

Results—Sighted Participants (Second
Website with Radio Buttons)



Mostly conceptual problems

How system (heat/cool/off) and fan (on/off/auto) interact
Pros



Can see options at once with radio buttons
More compact
Program easier
Cons



Cannot set time ranges in program
Physical separation of set temp and current temp
Radio buttons are small targets

Lack of feedback
24

Results—Sighted Participants (Third
Website with Links)
 Pros

Links are easier targets
 Cons

No feedback

Links suggest that it will go to another page

Lack of separation between system
(HEAT,COOL,OFF) and Fan settings

Hard to decipher (too many similar words)

Make buttons instead
25

Website Preferences (Sighted Participants)
 3 liked first website better

Clearer differentiation of functions

Organization of categories
 2 liked second website better

More visible

Less scrolling

Show all options at once
26

Results—Visually Impaired Participants
(First Website with Combo Boxes)



Problems: amount of time



Fan mode placement confusing, caused scrolling
Mislabeling “from”; “weekday”
26 out of 27 tasks (9 tasks x3 participants) were completed successfully
Pros

"Well done for accessibility!”


Simple, intuitive despite labeling issues
Loved combo boxes and ability to type in degrees
Cons

Make sure labeling makes sense with screen readers
27

Results—Visually Impaired Participants
(Second Website with Radio Buttons)



Problems: functionality


Forms mode not working with radio buttons
Labeling: “1 out of 3”
Pros



Simple
Still liked the combo boxes
Radio buttons listed after options
Cons

“Doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.”

Functionality problems but still think this version is harder to use

Prefer consistency of all combo boxes
28

Results—Visually Impaired Participants
(Third Website with Links)
 Pros

Links don’t take you to another page

Easier way to tab through options

Easier for non-technological oriented
 Cons

Could deter people who wouldn’t want to leave page

Two still think combo boxes are overall easier
29

Website Preferences (Visually Impaired
Participants)




2 strongly preferred first version

Simple, combo boxes easy
1 preferred third version followed by first

Dependent upon computer and JAWS familiarity?
3 liked the range

“from” to “to” in the first version
Can you see yourself using the web to control your thermostat at home?


“It would be cool!” Reliable and can use with any type of thermostat
“Absolutely! Send it to me!” Would also use it to control other systems: security and lights
30






Where to put fan mode?
How to layout and label program


Should “Set Program” be there?
Move “Run Program” next to “Set Program”?

Separate listings of days?

Group all weekdays and all weekend days?
System model needs to match the users’ mental models
Add more feedback


Show system status (e.g., HEAT is on)
Put current temperature closer to “Set temperature to”
Rework the system model


Use the capabilities of the software
Give user only the options that make sense at a time
31

 Learning a programming language is hard!





Web accessibility critical and very difficult!
Need to test with screen readers throughout process
People with disabilities do not want to spend any more money on technology
Individual differences in users’ preferences and experiences
Many different thermostats out there, making it difficult to have one mental model of how one works
32