skip to main content
10.1145/2513383.2517030acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesassetsConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

IncluCity: using contextual cues to raise awareness on environmental accessibility

Published:21 October 2013Publication History

ABSTRACT

Awareness campaigns aiming to highlight the accessibility challenges affecting people with disabilities face an important challenge. They often describe the environmental features that pose accessibility barriers out of context, and as a result public cannot relate to the problems at hand. In this paper we demonstrate that contextual cues can enhance people's perception and understanding of accessibility. We describe a two-week study where our participants submitted reports of inaccessible spots all over the city through a web application. Using a 2x2 factorial design we contrast the impact of two types of contextual cues, visual cues (i.e., displaying a picture of the inaccessible spot) and location cues (i.e., ability to zoom-in the exact location). We measure participants' perceptions of accessibility and how they are challenged to consider their own limitations and barriers that may also affect themselves in certain circumstances. Our results suggest that visual cues led to a bigger sense of urgency while also improving participants' attitude towards disability.

References

  1. Antonak, R. F. and Livneh, H. 2000. Measurement of Attitudes towards Persons with Disabilities. Disability and Rehabilitation 22, 5, 211--224.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Brewer, W. and Sampaio, C. 2006. Processes Leading to Confidence and Accuracy in Sentence Recognition: A Metamemory Approach. Memory 14, 5, 540--552.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Brodwin, M. G. and Orange, L. M. 2002. Attitudes toward Disability. In J. D. Andrew & C. W. Faubion (Eds.), Rehabilitation Services: An Introduction for the Human Services Professional. Osage Beach, MO: Aspen Professional Services, 145--173.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Brown, B., Reeves, S. and Sherwood, S. 2011. Into the wild: challenges and opportunities for field trial methods. In Proc. of CHI'11, ACM, 1657--1666. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Burton, E., Mitchell, L. (2006). Inclusive urban design: Streets for life. Architectural Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen, R. K., Brodwin, M. G., Cardoso, E. and Chan, F. 2002. Attitudes towards people with disabilities in the social context of dating and marriage: A comparison of American, Taiwanese and Singaporean college students. The Journal of Rehabilitation 68, 4, 5--11.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Cohen, G. 1996. Memory in the Real World. The Open University, Psychology Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Coleridge, P. 2000. Disability and culture. Asia Pacific Disability Rehabilitation Journal: Selected Readings in CBR Series 1: CBR in Transition: 2000, 21--38.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Conway, M. A. 2009. Episodic Memories. Neuropsychologia 47, 11, 2305--2313.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Conway, M. A. and Pleydell-Pearce, C. W. 2000. The Construction of Autobiographical Memories in the Selfmemory System. Psychological Review 107, 2, 261--288.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Goncalves, J., Ferreira, D., Hosio, S., Liu, Y., Rogstadius, J., Kukka, H. and Kostakos, V. 2013. Crowdsourcing on the Spot: Altruistic use of Public Displays, Feasibility, Performance, and Behaviours. In Proc. of UbiComp'13, ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Goncalves, J., Kostakos, V., Karapanos, E., Barreto, M., Camacho, T., Tomasic, A. and Zimmerman, J. 2013. Citizen Motivation on the Go: The Role of Psychological Empowerment. Interacting with Computers, online first.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Goncalves, J., Kostakos, V. and Venkatanathan, J. 2013. Narrowcasting in Social Media: Effects and Perceptions. In Proc. of ASONAM'13, IEEE.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. González, M. C., Hidalgo, C. A. and Barabási, A. 2008. Understanding Individual Human Mobility Patterns. Nature 453, 7196, 779--782.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Güldenpfennig, F. and Fitzpatrick, G. 2011. Getting more out of your images: augmenting photos for recollection and reminiscence. In Proc. of BCS-HCI '11, BCS, 467--472. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Hall, P. and Imrie, R. (2004). Inclusive design: designing and developing accessible environments. Taylor & Francis.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Harper, R., Randall, D., Smyth, N., Evans, C., Heledd, L. and Moore, R. 2008. The Past is a Different Place: They do Things Differently There. In Proc. of DIS'08, ACM, 271--280 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Hewes, R. L. and Toriello, P. J. 1998. Societal Attitudes and Alcohol Dependency: The Impact of Liver Transplantation Policy. Journal of Rehabilitation 64, 19--23Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Hosio, S., Goncalves, J., Kostakos, V., Cheverst, K. and Rogers, Y. 2013. Human Interfaces for Civic and Urban Engagement: HiCUE '13. In Proc. of UbiComp'13, ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Iwarsson, S. and Ståhl, A. (2003). Accessibility, usability and universal design-positioning and definition of concepts describing person-environment relationships. Disability & Rehabilitation 25, 2, 57--66.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Jacquet, J. L. and Pauly, D. 2007. The rise of seafood awareness campaigns in an era of collapsing fisheries. Marine Policy 31, 3, 308--313.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Kalnikaite, V., Sellen, A., Whittaker, S. and Kirk, D. 2010. Now let me see where I was: understanding how lifelogs mediate memory. In Proc. of CHI '10, ACM, 2045--2054. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Kalnikaite, V. and Whittaker, S. 2007. Software or Wetware?: Discovering When and Why People Use Digital Prosthetic Memory. In Proc. of CHI'07, ACM, 71--80. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Kukka, H., Oja, H., Kostakos, V., Goncalves, J., and Ojala, T. 2013. What Makes You Click: Exploring Visuals Signals to Entice Interaction on Public Displays. In Proc. of CHI'13, ACM, 1699--1708. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Livneh, H. 1991. On the Origins of Negative Attitudes toward People with Disabilities. In Marinelli, R. P. & Dell Orto, A. E. (Eds.), The Psychological and Social Impact of Disability, New York: Springer, 181--196.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Montag Foundation for Youth and Society (Ed.) 2011. Inklusion vor Ort. Kommunaler Index für Inklusion - ein Praxishandbuch. Berlin: Deutscher Verein.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Papas, R. K., Logan H. L. and Tomar S. L. 2004. Effectiveness of a community-based oral cancer awareness campaign. Cancer Causes Control 15, 2, 121--131.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Pfeifer, D. 2003. Disability Studies and the Disability Perspective. Disabilities Studies Quarterly 23, 1, 142--148.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Sellen, A., Fogg, A., Aitken, M., Hodges, S., Rother, C. and Wood, K. 2007. Do Life-logging Technologies Support Memory for the Past?: An Experimental Study Using Sensecam. In Proc. of CHI '07, ACM, 81--90. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Sellen, A. and Whittaker, S. 2010. Beyond Total Capture: A Constructive Critique of Lifelogging. Communications of the ACM 53, 5, 70--77. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Steinfeld, E., Duncan, J. and Cardell, P. (1977). Towards a Responsive Environment: The Psychosocial Effects of Inaccessibility. In M. J. Bednar (Ed.), Barrier-Free Environments. Stroudsburg, PA: Hutchinson & Ross, Inc.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Taylor, N., Cheverst, K., Fitton, D., Race, N. K. P., Rouncefield, M. and Graham, C. 2007. Probing Communities: Study of a Village Photo Display. In Proc. of OZCHI '07, ACM, 17--24. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Tulving, E. 1972. Episodic and Semantic Memory. In E. Tulving & W. Donaldson (Eds.), Organization of Memory, 381--403. New York: Academic Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. United Nations. 2006. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. URL: www.un.org/disabilities/documents/convention/convoptprot-e.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Wagenaar, W. A. 1994. Is Memory Self-Serving?, in U. N. & R. Fivush (Eds.), The RememberingSelf: Construction and Accuracy in the Self-Narrative, 191--204.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Whittaker, S., Hyland, P. and Wiley, M. 1994. FILOCHAT: Handwritten Notes Provide Access to Recorded Conversations. In Proc. of CHI'94, ACM, 271--277. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. World Health Organization 2001. International Classification for Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). WHO: Geneva.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. IncluCity: using contextual cues to raise awareness on environmental accessibility

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      ASSETS '13: Proceedings of the 15th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility
      October 2013
      343 pages
      ISBN:9781450324052
      DOI:10.1145/2513383

      Copyright © 2013 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 21 October 2013

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      ASSETS '13 Paper Acceptance Rate28of98submissions,29%Overall Acceptance Rate436of1,556submissions,28%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader