Tactile Facial Expressions and Associated Emotions toward Accessible Social Interactions for Individuals Who Are Blind

McDaniel, Troy; Tran, Diep; Devkota, Samjhana; DiLorenzo, Kaitlyn; Fakhri, Bijan; Panchanathan, Sethuraman

doi:10.1145/3264856.3264860

Cited by 11 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous work [16] focused on exploring significant differences in mean recognition accuracy for pattern type within the blind/VI group. No significant differences were found, indicating that no pattern, in particular, was more difficult to recognize in terms of its emotional content or facial movements.…”

Section: Study #2 Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Twelve of the fifteen action units from Study #1 were selected based on good representation of the six basic universal emotions for testing purposes. Some patterns were redesigned based on Study #1 results (compare Figures 3 and 4, and see [16] for full details). Study #1 results, discussed in the next section, showed no significant difference in pulse width variations between 250 and 750 ms, and so a pulse width of 250 ms was chosen (with a gap width of 50 ms).…”

Section: Visual-to-tactile Mappingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…3.6 1.6 3.8 1.7 Anger "Lower eyebrows" + "Squint eyes" 4.4 0. Similar to Study #1, the main contribution of this work is to investigate recognition performance differences between sighted and blind/VI groups rather subjects' performance and confusions on and between individual patterns, which is the focus of our previous presentation of Study #2 [16].…”

Section: Questions Mean (A) Sd (A) Mean (B) Sd (B)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The study of [15], which, from this point forward, we refer to as "Study #1", is presented here again, but with new results and analysis comparing the performance between individuals who are blind and sighted. The design of the tactile facial action units from [15] were once more improved, and used in a study [16] exploring how well individuals who are blind learn and recognize the associated emotions of these facial action units. The study of [16], which we will refer to as "Study #2", is presented again in this work, but with new results and analysis that explores similar performance questions posed in Study #1.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The design of the tactile facial action units from [15] were once more improved, and used in a study [16] exploring how well individuals who are blind learn and recognize the associated emotions of these facial action units. The study of [16], which we will refer to as "Study #2", is presented again in this work, but with new results and analysis that explores similar performance questions posed in Study #1. To summarize, the aim the work here is to shed light on the following questions: (1) How well can individuals who are blind recognize tactile facial action units compared to those who are sighted?…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

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

McDaniel

Tran

Chowdhury

et al. 2019

MTI

Self Cite

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

Section: Study #2 Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Visual-to-tactile Mappingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Questions Mean (A) Sd (A) Mean (B) Sd (B)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

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

McDaniel

Tran

Chowdhury

et al. 2019

MTI

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Therapeutic Haptics for Mental Health and Wellbeing

McDaniel

Panchanathan

2019

Haptic Interfaces for Accessibility, Health, and Enhanced Quality of Life

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Investigating socially assistive systems from system design and evaluation: a systematic review

Qiu

Kang

et al. 2021

Univ Access Inf Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The development of assistive technologies that support people in social interactions has attracted increased attention in HCI. This paper presents a systematic review of studies of Socially Assistive Systems targeted at older adults and people with disabilities. The purpose is threefold: (1) Characterizing related assistive systems with a special focus on the system design, primarily including HCI technologies used and user-involvement approach taken; (2) Examining their ways of system evaluation; (3) Reflecting on insights for future design research. Methods A systematic literature search was conducted using the keywords “social interactions” and “assistive technologies” within the following databases: Scopus, Web of Science, ACM, Science Direct, PubMed, and IEEE Xplore. Results Sixty-five papers met the inclusion criteria and were further analyzed. Our results showed that there were 11 types of HCI technologies that supported social interactions for target users. The most common was cognitive and meaning understanding technologies, often applied with wearable devices for compensating users’ sensory loss; 33.85% of studies involved end-users and stakeholders in the design phase; Four types of evaluation methods were identified. The majority of studies adopted laboratory experiments to measure user-system interaction and system validation. Proxy users were used in system evaluation, especially in initial experiments; 42.46% of evaluations were conducted in field settings, primarily including the participants’ own homes and institutions. Conclusion We contribute an overview of Socially Assistive Systems that support social interactions for older adults and people with disabilities, as well as illustrate emerging technologies and research opportunities for future work.

show abstract

Tactile Facial Expressions and Associated Emotions toward Accessible Social Interactions for Individuals Who Are Blind

Cited by 11 publications

References 10 publications

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

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

Therapeutic Haptics for Mental Health and Wellbeing

Investigating socially assistive systems from system design and evaluation: a systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About