47 haptic maps ntu


Published on

Published in: Technology, Business
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

47 haptic maps ntu

  1. 1. Evaluation of Haptic RIA MapsDavid J. Brown and Lindsay J. Evett,ISRG, Nottingham Trent University AEGIS Workshop and International Conference, Brussels
  2. 2. IntroductionPeople who are blind use sequential, route based strategies for navigating round the real world, rather than external, or allocentric, frames of referencesMore map-based strategies better for navigational tasks for people who are blind (Hill, et al, 1993); training in such strategies greatly improves performance (Cummins and Rieser, 2008; Simonnet et al, 2006)Allocentric mapping involves identifying location relative to perceptible landmarks (external frames of reference) and encoding vectors between landmarks to provide a flexible system to determine location as the person moves around the environment (Feigenbaum and Morris (2004)) AEGIS Workshop and International Conference, Brussels
  3. 3. Spatial mental modelsExternal frames of reference and map based strategies are more efficient and flexible – easier to remember, alternative routes can be taken, shortcuts made and destinations changed because they encompass a more complete spatial representation (Martinsen et al, 2007)Oliver and Burnett (2008) – route guidance systems suppress cognitive map developmentActive exploration of virtual worlds and maps to support development of map-based strategies and spatial mental models (Tversky, 1993) to support independent navigational skills AEGIS Workshop and International Conference, Brussels
  4. 4. Spatial representationsWe are investigating a range of games based and assistive technologies that can support development of allocentric navigational strategies in people who are blind, and continually assessing their efficacyIn some circumstances these technologies offer advantages over real world route learning as they may help generate a fuller spatial cognitive representation, involve active learning positions, and be available for use on a daily basis (unlike real world training support) AEGIS Workshop and International Conference, Brussels
  5. 5. Haptic RIA MapsHaptic RIA maps is an application whereby visually impaired users can explore a web- based representation of a street map using a force feedback/haptic deviceAs well as haptic feedback there are auditory cues, such as street names, and a sonification mechanism which provides distance informationCan this system provide information equivalent to that provided to sighted users by conventional 2D maps? AEGIS Workshop and International Conference, Brussels
  6. 6. Spatial representation and Haptic MapsCan people who are blind read Haptic Maps and get useful information out of them? (spatial information, contextual information…)What is the level of improved spatial information? e.g., find out more about an unknown space, used it to extend a known route, or take alternative routes, or create a new route, take different perspectives…..? AEGIS Workshop and International Conference, Brussels
  7. 7. Nature of Information generated by Haptic MapsTests proposed to assess whether active exploration of Haptic Maps can support development of spatial mental models, and the complexity of those representationsThe efficacy of the Haptic RIA Maps can be compared to the use of Touch Over Maps, and other navigational and Way Finding support systems, such as the Virtual Cane, Route Mate and Point Nav AEGIS Workshop and International Conference, Brussels
  8. 8. AEGIS Haptic RIA Maps Test Tasks1. Search for a location; map generated through OpenStreetMap; after a map has loaded, generate 3D representations (i.e., create haptic map)2. Explore the map, feel the haptic feedback, hear the auditory feedback: While moving on the streets, different sounds generated e.g., when standing at an intersection; pitch of sound indicates approximately distance to next intersection; press LCtrl for street; ~ for POI information3. Search for a specific street name4. Move/relocate the map: move around to see more of the map using the arrow keys. Press the spacebar to restore haptics5. Zoom: Zoom the map in and out one step; wait until street info resumes. Space bar restores haptics. AEGIS Workshop and International Conference, Brussels
  9. 9. ParticipantsLUND tested with 9 people: 1 test leader who alsoperformed a heuristic evaluation, 2 pilot testers and 6users. Both the pilot testers and 2 end users were fullysighted but used simulated cataract glasses. 1 user isblind, 3 have low visionFONCE/UPM tested with 5 blind users, and 3 expertsformed the focus groupEPR tested with 8 blind/partially sighted users, 10 expertsNTU tested with 2 blind users, 1 tutor and 3 experts (allsighted). All took part in the focus group discussion.LUND used the PHANToM OMNI; all others used the NovintFalcon AEGIS Workshop and International Conference, Brussels
  10. 10. Participants - experienceLUND users all had varying degrees of experience with force feedback hapticsNTU blind users had some limited experience of tactile maps; both use GPS and had some very limited experience with the FalconFONCE/UPM users were experienced with Braille maps and GPS but had no experience of haptic devicesEPR users had experience with swell paper and relief usage, but none had ever worked with a Falcon device before AEGIS Workshop and International Conference, Brussels
  11. 11. Degree of Visual ImpairmentPartial sightedness: someone who has serious loss of vision even when correctedBlind: severe sight loss even when corrected; may be totalLow vision: moderate sight loss (NHS choices, 2011; Wikipedia, 2011)Aegis: Low vision users (users with a sight impairment and blindness with useful residual vision) rate: 1. mild; 2. moderate; 3. severe Blind users (without useful residual vision) rate: 4. total AEGIS Workshop and International Conference, Brussels
  12. 12. Results – tasks (b/ps users only)1. Search: Search stage not accessible by screenreader2. Explore Map: All groups found the Haptic feedback to be unstable. Those using the Falcon found it very difficult to use, haptic feedback was erratic and inconsistent, the device was prone to violently lurching and sometimes no haptic feedback could be felt at all3. Search for specific street:LUND – all users able to do tasks at least partly without help, but hard to find street with no guidanceFONCE/UPM – needed to know the area, or have explored Braille map to do thisEPR – mostly failedNTU – one could, one couldn‟t AEGIS Workshop and International Conference, Brussels
  13. 13. Results - tasks (contd.)4. Move/relocate the mapLUND – all users able to do tasks at least partly without helpFONCE/UPM – not mentionedEPR – couldn‟t do itNTU – if any key press etc. while map relocating system crashed, so didn‟t do this5. ZOOMLUND – all users able to do tasks at least partly without helpFONCE/UPM – easier with fewer streetsEPR - couldn‟t do itNTU – didn‟t work when in map AEGIS Workshop and International Conference, Brussels
  14. 14. Results – auditory feedbackNTU: position of tilde key on English keyboards made it difficult to use. One of the blind users was left handed, found all the key commands awkwardAll Falcon users had to go very slowly to be able to use it at all, to try and keep on the streets. Very easy to lift off the streets, audio feedback stopped.No cues to leaving the map, so difficult to know if left the boundary of the map, or lifted the device off the mapSpanish users found verbal output difficult – Street names in Spanish BUT the rest in English, and pronunciations were difficult to understand. NTU found the voice difficult to understand. EPR reported the auditory feedback overall as good, but sometimes the CTRL key did not generate any feedbackLag on TTS and sonification could cause problems; sonification could be difficult to understand, unpleasant AEGIS Workshop and International Conference, Brussels
  15. 15. Results – SummaryVerbal feedback difficult to understand; sonification OK but could be improved (some lag on both)Relocating and zooming unreliable; only LUND able to do these, but users didn‟t like losing their reference points, and having to turn haptics back onAll wanted indication of edge of mapThe PHANToM appears to be easier to use than the Falcon, but still haptic feedback is unstableBoth interaction devices involve a complicated relationship with the map representation (actions don‟t have direct/simple relationship with the map); PHANToM works better but too expensiveAll groups liked the idea of the application; there were limitations with cues and feedback, but overriding difficulty was with the haptic feedback, especially for the Falcon AEGIS Workshop and International Conference, Brussels
  16. 16. Results – NTU commentsOne blind user could do it all, but found it difficult to “keep on the map”; found the voice difficult to understand and the sonification a bit difficult, slightly unpleasantNONE of the other NTU users could use it easily (1 blind, 4 sighted), although the sighted users did manage to move to the specified street AEGIS Workshop and International Conference, Brussels
  17. 17. What to do?Better device? MS haptic mouse? Better haptics?Consider aims of app – to help blind users build a useful, spatial cognitive representation of the map areaConsider relationship between cognitive representation, actions, map representationNeed more direct and reliable relationship between themNeed reference points (implicit in a spatial mental model, multiple perspectives) AEGIS Workshop and International Conference, Brussels
  18. 18. Touch Over mapsHaptiMap demonstrator (HaptiMap, 2011)Has all the desirable attributes: user actions have a direct, reliable, relationship with maps Simple reference points (may need more on tablet) easy to use (2 blind users) can reproduce the map (2 blind users) BUT 1 blind user with resid. vision found areas with patchy feedback, frustrating and poor info.MS haptic mouse could have similar attributesTo have both would give desktop and mobile apps AEGIS Workshop and International Conference, Brussels
  19. 19. Further workInvestigate MS haptic mouse; improve haptics?Evaluate the information obtained from exploring the map; can users create spatial mental models?Can they use this information: to know about the layout and content of an area? to find out about an area in which they have known routes (to overcome obstacles, changes)? to extend a known route? to create a new route? AEGIS Workshop and International Conference, Brussels
  20. 20. Evaluate Spatial Mental ModelsDoes model contain spatial relationships,allow multiple perspectives, sufficient foractual route finding? Possible tasks:1. Recreate map2. Describe routes from A to B and from C to B3. Study area where known route: • demonstrate ability to deal with obstacles • extend known route • create new route AEGIS Workshop and International Conference, Brussels
  21. 21. ConclusionsBoth Falcon and Phantom have significant usability issues and are expensiveAlternative device – (Microsoft Haptic Mouse, £30). This gives much more direct correspondence between real movement and virtual responseImprove haptic information in appTouch Over Maps – direct correspondence between actions and map; reference pointsCan blind/partially sighted obtain useful information from these apps? Usable spatial cognitive representations – research to evaluate AEGIS Workshop and International Conference, Brussels
  22. 22. Comparison to other technologiesVirtual Cane – to support development of both egocentric and allocentric strategies (Evett at al, 2009). Similarities to the aims of Haptic Maps, but levels of scale and details are differentPoint Nav (HaptiMap, 2011)Talking GPS (Trekker; Mobile Accessibility)RouteMate (Brown et al, 2011)Bluetooth/wireless indoor way points (Evett at al, 2011) AEGIS Workshop and International Conference, Brussels
  23. 23. ReferencesAegis (2011). DOWNLOADS: WAI ARIA enabled plugins; Haptic RIA Maps,http://www.aegis-project.eu/ accessed 23/11/11Brown, D. J., D. McHugh, P. Standen, L. Evett, N. Shopland, S. Battersby(2011), Designing location-based learning experiences for people withintellectual disabilities and additional sensory impairments, Computers andEducation, vol. 56, pp. 11–20.Code Factory (2011b) Mobile Accessibility for Android,http://www.codefactory.es/en/products.asp?id=415 accessed 29/3/11Craik, K. J. W. (1943) The Nature of Explanation, CUPCummins P A & Rieser J J (2008), Strategies of maintaining dynamic spatialorientation when walking without vision, In Blindness and Brain Plasticity inNavigation and Object Perception (J J Rieser, D H Ashmead, F F Ebner and A LCorn, Eds), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New York, pp. 227-238Evett, L., T. Allen, M. Javad Akhlaghinia, N. Shopland (2011). I needassistance: Smart phones as assistive devices, Proceedings InteractiveTechnology and Games, Nottingham UK AEGIS Workshop and International Conference, Brussels
  24. 24. References (contd.)Evett L, Battersby S, Ridley A, and Brown DJ. (2009). An interface to virtualenvironments for people who are blind using Wii technology – mental modelsand navigation. Journal of Assistive Technologies, 3 (2), pp.30-39Feigenbaum, J. D. and Morris, R. G. (2004). “Allocentric versus egocentricspatial memory after unilateral temporal lobectomy in humans”.Neuropsychology, 18, 462-472HaptiMap (2011) HaptiMap project outline,http://www.haptimap.org/home/about-haptimap.html accessed 14/11/11Hill E W, Rieser J J, Hill M, Halpin J & Halpin R (1993), How persons with visualimpairments explore novel spaces: strategies of good and poor performers, J.Vis. Imp. and Blindness, 87, 8, pp. 295-301Humanware (2011a) Trekker Breeze, http://www.humanware.com/en-united_kingdom/products/blindness/talking_gps/trekker_breeze/_details/id_101/trekker_breeze_handheld_talking_gps.html accessed 12/10/11Martinsen, H., J. M. Tellevik, B. Elmerskog, M. Storlilokken (2007). Mentaleffort in mobility route learning, J. of Vis. Imp. and Blindness, 101, pp1-18. AEGIS Workshop and International Conference, Brussels
  25. 25. References (contd.)NHS choices (2011) Visual impairment, http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/visual-impairment/Pages/Introduction.aspx accessed 14/11/11Oliver, K. J., Burnett, G. E. (2008). Learning-oriented vehicle navigationsystems: a preliminary investigation in a driving simulator. In Proceedings ofthe 10th International Conference on Human–Computer Interaction with MobileDevices and Services. pp. 119–126Simonnet M, Guinard J-Y & Tisseau J (2006), Preliminary work for vocal andhaptic navigation software for blind sailors, Proc. 6th Intl Conf. Disability,Virtual Reality & Assoc. Tech. (ICDVRAT), Esbjerg, Denmark, 2006, pp. 255-262Tversky, B (1993) Cognitive maps, cognitive collages and spatial mentalmodels, in Frank, A U and Campari, I (Eds.) Spatial Information Theory: ATheoretical Basis for GIS, Proceedings COSIT „93, Lecture Notes in ComputerScience, 716, pp. 14-24, Springer, BerlinWikipedia contributors (2011) Low vision. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopaedia.November 1, 2011, 18:42 UTC. Available at:http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Low_vision&oldid=458503177Accessed November 15, 2011. AEGIS Workshop and International Conference, Brussels