Designing and Evaluating a Wearable Device for Accessing Gaze Signals from the Sighted

Qiu, Shi; Rauterberg, Matthias; Hu, Jun

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-40250-5_43

Cited by 10 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The category “people with disabilities” consisted of six subcategories: (a) visual impairments (20 studies), (b) ASD (9 studies), (c) listening and speech impairments (7 studies), (d) mobility and physical impairments (5 studies), as well as (e) others (3 studies). In more detail, among 20 studies of people with visual impairments, the most common (14/20) is to develop SASs to help blind people perceive social signals, including identifying facial expressions of interaction partners [ 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 ], or sensing eye gaze from sighted people [ 33 , 34 ]. Additionally, in [ 19 ], the researchers presented the idea of artificial eyes, to establish “eye contact” between a blind person and a sighted conversation partner.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As for studies aimed at assisting social communication of people with visual or hearing impairment, the experience and perception of the primary users’ social counterparts were sometimes the objectives of the data gathering. Namely, studies by [ 33 , 78 , 80 ] gathered experiences of sighted people who interacted with the visually impaired group, while [ 43 ] explored the perception of conversation partners about the assistive system designed for people with hearing loss.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A total of 26 studies used questionnaires to collect data. These studies were targeted at older adult, i.e., [ 17 , 18 , 58 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 69 ], people with visual impairments, i.e., [ 19 , 28 , 29 , 33 , 34 , 77 , 80 , 83 , 85 , 87 ], deafness, i.e., [ 43 , 46 , 48 ], and physical disabilities, i.e., [ 50 , 54 ]. A total of 34 questionnaires ( Table 3 ) from 26 studies consisted of two categories: (a) standardized questionnaires (N = 21 questionnaires) and (b) self-developed questionnaires (N = 13 questionnaires).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A Review of Data Gathering Methods for Evaluating Socially Assistive Systems

Qiu

Kang

et al. 2021

Sensors

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social interactions significantly impact the quality of life for people with special needs (e.g., older adults with dementia and children with autism). They may suffer loneliness and social isolation more often than people without disabilities. There is a growing demand for technologies to satisfy the social needs of such user groups. However, evaluating these systems can be challenging due to the extra difficulty of gathering data from people with special needs (e.g., communication barriers involving older adults with dementia and children with autism). Thus, in this systematic review, we focus on studying data gathering methods for evaluating socially assistive systems (SAS). Six academic databases (i.e., Scopus, Web of Science, ACM, Science Direct, PubMed, and IEEE Xplore) were searched, covering articles published from January 2000 to July 2021. A total of 65 articles met the inclusion criteria for this systematic review. The results showed that existing SASs most often targeted people with visual impairments, older adults, and children with autism. For instance, a common type of SASs aimed to help blind people perceive social signals (e.g., facial expressions). SASs were most commonly assessed with interviews, questionnaires, and observation data. Around half of the interview studies only involved target users, while the other half also included secondary users or stakeholders. Questionnaires were mostly used with older adults and people with visual impairments to measure their social interaction, emotional state, and system usability. A great majority of observational studies were carried out with users in special age groups, especially older adults and children with autism. We thereby contribute an overview of how different data gathering methods were used with various target users of SASs. Relevant insights are extracted to inform future development and research.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Review of Data Gathering Methods for Evaluating Socially Assistive Systems

Qiu

Kang

et al. 2021

Sensors

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The possibility is blind people have a fuzzy understanding regarding the gaze behaviors [55]. For the blindfolded participants, although they well understand the gaze and eye contact, they still need some time to be familiar with the relationship between the gaze and the tactile signal [56].…”

Section: A the Effect Of Tactile Feedback And Interactive Gazementioning

confidence: 99%

An Evaluation of a Wearable Assistive Device for Augmenting Social Interactions

Qiu

Han

et al. 2020

IEEE Access

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gaze behaviors contain rich information regarding a person's emotions and engagements. Reciprocal eye contact can invoke feelings of liking between two strangers. But blind people cannot perceive and establish the eye contact with sighted counterparts, causing their feelings of social isolation and low confidence in conversations. Thus, our research purpose is to let blind people perceive and react gaze behaviors in social interactions. A Social Glasses system has been implemented iteratively to deliver the multisensory feedback channels of the "eye contact", integrating both visual and tactile feedback. Specifically, the system consists of a Social Glasses device and a tactile wristband, which are worn by a blind person. The Social Glasses simulates the natural gaze for the blind person, aiming at establishing the "eye contact" between blind and sighted people. The tactile wristband enables the blind person to perceive the corresponding tactile feedback when an "eye contact" happens. To test the system, we conducted a user experiment with 40 participants, including 10 blind-sighted pairs (N=20) and 10 blindfolded-sighted pairs (N=20), to see how it could help increase the communication quality between blind and sighted people, as well as to suggest implications for its design. Our main findings demonstrated that both the simulated gaze and the tactile feedback were significantly effective to enhance the communication quality in blind-sighted conversations. Overall, we contribute (1) empirical research findings on how a Social Glasses system enhances the communication quality in blind-sighted conversations; and (2) design principles to inform future assistive wearable device for augmenting social interactions. INDEX TERMS Accessibility, artificial gaze, assistive technology, communication quality, eye tracking, face-to-face communication, gaze contact, visual impairments.

show abstract

“…Researchers have targeted nonverbal cues of eye gaze, interpersonal distance, and facial expressions. Qiu et al [3] proposed a device for individuals who are blind consisting of a band of vibration motors worn around the head to map eye gaze information to vibrotactile stimulation. The device mapped a quick visual glance to a short vibrotactile burst, and a fixation to a repeating vibrotactile pattern.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recognition of Tactile Facial Action Units by Individuals Who Are Blind and Sighted: A Comparative Study

McDaniel

Tran

Chowdhury

et al. 2019

MTI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Given that most cues exchanged during a social interaction are nonverbal (e.g., facial expressions, hand gestures, body language), individuals who are blind are at a social disadvantage compared to their sighted peers. Very little work has explored sensory augmentation in the context of social assistive aids for individuals who are blind. The purpose of this study is to explore the following questions related to visual-to-vibrotactile mapping of facial action units (the building blocks of facial expressions): (1) How well can individuals who are blind recognize tactile facial action units compared to those who are sighted? (2) How well can individuals who are blind recognize emotions from tactile facial action units compared to those who are sighted? These questions are explored in a preliminary pilot test using absolute identification tasks in which participants learn and recognize vibrotactile stimulations presented through the Haptic Chair, a custom vibrotactile display embedded on the back of a chair. Study results show that individuals who are blind are able to recognize tactile facial action units as well as those who are sighted. These results hint at the potential for tactile facial action units to augment and expand access to social interactions for individuals who are blind.

show abstract

Designing and Evaluating a Wearable Device for Accessing Gaze Signals from the Sighted

Cited by 10 publications

References 12 publications

A Review of Data Gathering Methods for Evaluating Socially Assistive Systems

A Review of Data Gathering Methods for Evaluating Socially Assistive Systems

An Evaluation of a Wearable Assistive Device for Augmenting Social Interactions

Recognition of Tactile Facial Action Units by Individuals Who Are Blind and Sighted: A Comparative Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About