Is There a Future for Sensory Substitution Outside Academic Laboratories?

Abstract

Sensory substitution devices (SSDs) have been developed with the ultimate purpose of supporting sensory deprived individuals in their daily activities. However, more than forty years after their first appearance in the scientific literature, SSDs still remain more common in research laboratories than in the daily life of people with sensory deprivation. Here, we seek to identify the reasons behind the limited diffusion of SSDs among the blind community by discussing the ergonomic, neurocognitive and psychosocial issues potentially associated with the use of these systems. We stress that these issues should be considered together when developing future devices or improving existing ones. We provide some examples of how to achieve this by adopting a multidisciplinary and participatory approach. These efforts would contribute not solely to address fundamental theoretical research questions, but also to better understand the everyday needs of blind people and eventually promote the use of SSDs outside laboratories.

Improving training for sensory augmentation using the science of expertise

“…Provision of support and training was identified as a factor in the abandonment of traditional assistive technology (Phillips & Zhao, 1993;Batavia & Hammer, 1990) and it has been suggested as a factor in improving SSAD use (Elli et al, 2014;Maidenbaum et al, 2014). In the present paper, following a summary of the applications of SSADs and the reasons why they may be rejected, we suggest how the findings of cognitive science can be leveraged to improve the process of learning to use an SSAD.…”

“…Other research has found that users value device performance, particularly how the device meets expectations of performance, reliability, durability, comfort, safety and ease of use (Batavia & Hammer, 1990;Riemer-Reiss & Wacker, 2000). Several of the factors highlighted from research into traditional assistive technology been repeated by reviews focusing on SSADs, along with some that are specific to SSADs: lack of availability, lack of awareness of their existence, concerns about their appearance, cost, difficulty in setting up, and the potential to mask important auditory cues in life (Maidenbaum et al, 2014;Elli et al, 2014). Some of these priorities have been addressed by SSAD researchers: to ensure that the device does not fall short of expected performance due to high expectations, Nau and colleagues begin their training program with an explanation of the capabilities and limits of the device (Nau et al, 2015b), and to improve ease of use, some groups have examined how intuitive the encoding of information is intuitive and easy to understand (Hamilton-Fletcher et al, 2016).…”

“…The lack of professional support, adequate training the absence of followup training in their own home has been identified as a factor in device underuse, especially when the users environment or physical condition changes (Riemer-Reiss & Wacker, 2000;Hocking, 1999;Batavia & Hammer, 1990). The importance of training has been echoed by reviews of the underuse of SSADs, with the suggestion that the creation of ordered training plans would enhance the field (Maidenbaum et al, 2014;Elli et al, 2014). Support in training may be more important for SSADs than for other forms of assistive technology -Nau et al (2015b) compares the extensive rehabilitation process to that of a hand transplant patient.…”

“…The importance of support in learning to use an SSAD has been echoed by reviews of the underuse of SSADs, which suggest that the creation of ordered training plans would enhance the field (Maidenbaum et al, 2014;Elli et al, 2014).…”

A Survey on Hardware and Software Solutions for Multimodal Wearable Assistive Devices Targeting the Visually Impaired

“…Even today, the widespread adoption of SSDs (sensory substitution devices) outside of academia seems to face steep challenges. As suggested by Elli et al, this may be due to the fact that effectively coordinating issues arising from the different perspectives of ergonomics, neuroscience, and social psychology is a tricky business [5].…”