research-article

The Impact of Assistive Technology on Communication Quality Between Deaf and Hearing Individuals

Authors:

Jan Gugenheimer,

Katrin Plaumann,

Florian Schaub,

Patrizia Di Campli San Vito,

Enrico RukzioAuthors Info & Claims

CSCW '17: Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing

Pages 669 - 682

https://doi.org/10.1145/2998181.2998203

Published: 25 February 2017 Publication History

Abstract

Deaf individuals often experience communication difficulties in face-to-face interactions with hearing people. In order to support deaf individuals in such situations, an active stream of assistive technology (AT) research focuses on real-time translation of sign language. We investigate the impact of real-time translation-based ATs on communication quality between deaf and hearing individuals. We conducted a focus group and aWizard of Oz study in which deaf and hearing participants jointly interacted with different assistive technologies. We find that while ATs facilitate communication, communication quality is degraded by to breaks in the conversation. Using Co-Cultural Theory, we identify deaf people as a subordinate group inside a hearing society. Our results indicate that current ATs reinforce this subordination by emphasizing deficiency of mastering the dominant form of communication. Based on our findings, we propose a change in design perspective by enabling the hearing to sign rather than the deaf to "hear". We argue that ATs should not be seen as "just" a tool for the Deaf but rather as a collaborative technology.

References

[1]

Ava. 2016. Ava Communicate beyond barriers. (2016). http://www.ava.me/ Last accessed: 2016 - 05 - 27.

[2]

George I Balch and Donna M Mertens. 1999. Focus group design and group dynamics: Lessons from deaf and hard of hearing participants. American Journal of Evaluation 20, 2 (1999), 265--277.

[3]

Steven Barnett, Jonathan D. Klein, Robert Q. Pollard, Vincent Samar, Deirdre Schlehofer, Matthew Starr, Erika Sutter, Hongmei Yang, and Thomas A. Pearson. Community Participatory Research With Deaf Sign Language Users to Identify Health Inequities. 101, 12 (????), 2235--2238.

[4]

Margaret M Bradley and Peter J Lang. 1994. Measuring emotion: the self-assessment manikin and the semantic differential. Journal of behavior therapy and experimental psychiatry 25, 1 (1994), 49--59.

[5]

Andreas Bulling and Kai Kunze. 2016. Eyewear computers for human-computer interaction. interactions 23, 3 (2016), 70--73.

Digital Library

[6]

Judee K Burgoon and Jerold L Hale. 1988. Nonverbal expectancy violations: Model elaboration and application to immediacy behaviors. Communications Monographs 55, 1 (1988), 58--79.

[7]

Fabio Buttussi, Luca Chittaro, Elio Carchietti, and Marco Coppo. 2010. Using Mobile Devices to Support Communication Between Emergency Medical Responders and Deaf People. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Human Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services (MobileHCI '10). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 7--16.

Digital Library

[8]

Albert M Cook and Janice Miller Polgar. 2014. Assistive technologies: Principles and practice. Elsevier Health Sciences.

[9]

Marilyn E Demorest and Sue Ann Erdman. 1986. Scale composition and item analysis of the Communication Profile for the Hearing Impaired. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 29, 4 (1986), 515--535.

[10]

Alistair Edwards. 1995. Extraordinary Human-Computer Interaction: Interfaces for Users with Disabilities. Vol. 7. CUP Archive.

Digital Library

[11]

Howard Giles, Nikolas Coupland, and IUSTINE Coupland. 1991. 1. Accommodation theory: Communication, context, and. Contexts of accommodation: Developments in applied sociolinguistics 1 (1991).

[12]

W Gudykunst. 1995. Anxiety/uncertainty management theory. Intercultural communication theory (1995), 8--58.

[13]

Richard S Hallam and Roslyn Corney. 2014. Conversation tactics in persons with normal hearing and hearing-impairment. International journal of audiology 53, 3 (2014), 174--181.

[14]

Rom Harre and Paul F Secord. 1972. The explanation of social behaviour. (1972).

[15]

Nancy CM Hartsock. 1983. The feminist standpoint: Developing the ground for a specifically feminist historical materialism. In Discovering reality. Springer, 283--310.

[16]

Matt Huenerfauth, Elaine Gale, Brian Penly, Mackenzie Willard, and Dhananjai Hariharan. 2015. Comparing Methods of Displaying Language Feedback for Student Videos of American Sign Language. In Proceedings of the 17th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers & Accessibility (ASSETS '15). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 139--146.

Digital Library

[17]

International Standardisation Organisation. 1998. 9241--11. 1998. Ergonomic Requirements for Office Work with Visual Display Terminals (VDTs) Part II Guidance on Usability (1998).

[18]

Dhruv Jain, Leah Findlater, Jamie Gilkeson, Benjamin Holland, Ramani Duraiswami, Dmitry Zotkin, Christian Vogler, and Jon E. Froehlich. 2015. Head-Mounted Display Visualizations to Support Sound Awareness for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '15). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 241--250.

Digital Library

[19]

Pat Jangyodsuk, Christopher Conly, and Vassilis Athitsos. 2014. Sign Language Recognition Using Dynamic Time Warping and Hand Shape Distance Based on Histogram of Oriented Gradient Features. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on PErvasive Technologies Related to Assistive Environments (PETRA '14). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 50, 6 pages.

Digital Library

[20]

Hernisa Kacorri, Allen Harper, and Matt Huenerfauth. 2013. Comparing Native Signers' Perception of American Sign Language Animations and Videos via Eye Tracking. In Proceedings of the 15th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS '13). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 9, 8 pages.

Digital Library

[21]

Hernisa Kacorri, Matt Huenerfauth, Sarah Ebling, Kasmira Patel, and Mackenzie Willard. 2015. Demographic and Experiential Factors Influencing Acceptance of Sign Language Animation by Deaf Users. In Proceedings of the 17th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers & Accessibility (ASSETS '15). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 147--154.

Digital Library

[22]

L. J. Kau, W. L. Su, P. J. Yu, and S. J. Wei. 2015. A real-time portable sign language translation system. In 2015 IEEE 58th International Midwest Symposium on Circuits and Systems (MWSCAS). 1--4.

[23]

Michael Kipp, Quan Nguyen, Alexis Heloir, and Silke Matthes. 2011. Assessing the Deaf User Perspective on Sign Language Avatars. In The Proceedings of the 13th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS '11). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 107--114.

Digital Library

[24]

Cheris Kramarae. 2005. Muted group theory and communication: Asking dangerous questions. Women and Language 28, 2 (2005), 55.

[25]

Raja S. Kushalnagar, Anna C. Cavender, and Jehan-François Paris. 2010. Multiple View Perspectives: Improving Inclusiveness and Video Compression in Mainstream Classroom Recordings. In Proceedings of the 12th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS '10). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 123--130.

Digital Library

[26]

Raja S. Kushalnagar, Walter S. Lasecki, and Jeffrey P. Bigham. 2012. A Readability Evaluation of Real-time Crowd Captions in the Classroom. In Proceedings of the 14th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS '12). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 71--78.

Digital Library

[27]

Lewis, M. Paul, Gary F. Simons, and Charles D. Fennig (eds.). 2016. Ethnologue: Languages of the World (nineteenth ed.). Dallas, Texas: SIL International. Online version: http://www.ethnologue.com.

[28]

Matthias Mielke and Rainer Bruck. 2015. A Pilot Study About the Smartwatch As Assistive Device for Deaf People. In Proceedings of the 17th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers & Accessibility (ASSETS '15). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 301--302.

Digital Library

[29]

MotionSavvy. 2016. MotionSavvy. (2016). http://www.motionsavvy.com/ Last accessed: 2016 - 0527.

[30]

Betsy Phillips M.S. and Hongxin Zhao Ph.D. 1993. Predictors of Assistive Technology Abandonment. Assistive Technology 5, 1 (1993), 36--45. 10171664

[31]

Mark P Orbe. 1998. Constructing co-cultural theory: An explication of culture, power, and communication. Sage.

[32]

World Health Organization. 2016. Deafness and hearing loss. (2016). http: //www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs300/en/ Last accessed: 2016 - 05 - 27.

[33]

Prajwal Paudyal, Ayan Banerjee, and Sandeep K.S. Gupta. 2016. SCEPTRE: A Pervasive, Non-Invasive, and Programmable Gesture Recognition Technology. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI '16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 282--293.

Digital Library

[34]

Anne Marie Piper and James D. Hollan. 2008. Supporting Medical Conversations Between Deaf and Hearing Individuals with Tabletop Displays. In Proceedings of the 2008 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW '08). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 147--156.

Digital Library

[35]

Soraia Silva Prietch and Lucia Vilela Leite Filgueiras. 2015. Human-Computer Interaction -- INTERACT 2015: 15th IFIP TC 13 International Conference, Bamberg, Germany, September 14--18, 2015, Proceedings, Part I. Springer International Publishing, Cham, Chapter Technology Acceptance Evaluation by Deaf Students Considering the Inclusive Education Context, 20--37.

[36]

Marti L Riemer-Reiss and Robbyn R Wacker. 2000. Factors associated with assistive technology discontinuance among individuals with disabilities. Journal of Rehabilitation 66, 3 (2000), 44.

[37]

Enrico Rukzio, Paul Holleis, and Hans Gellersen. 2011. Personal projectors for pervasive computing. IEEE Pervasive Computing 2 (2011), 30--37.

Digital Library

[38]

Kristen Shinohara and Jacob O. Wobbrock. 2011. In the Shadow of Misperception: Assistive Technology Use and Social Interactions. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '11). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 705--714.

Digital Library

[39]

Brent N. Shiver and Rosalee J. Wolfe. 2015. Evaluating Alternatives for Better Deaf Accessibility to Selected Web-Based Multimedia. In Proceedings of the 17th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers & Accessibility (ASSETS '15). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 231--238.

Digital Library

[40]

Robert Smith, Sara Morrissey, and Harold Somers. 2010. HCI for the Deaf community: Developing human-like avatars for sign language synthesis. In Proceedings of the 4th Irish Human Computer Interaction Conference (iHCI 2010). Dublin City University.

[41]

Jessica J. Tran, Ben Flowers, Eve A. Risken, Richard J. Ladner, and Jacob O. Wobbrock. 2014. Analyzing the Intelligibility of Real-time Mobile Sign Language Video Transmitted Below Recommended Standards. In Proceedings of the 16th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers & Accessibility (ASSETS '14). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 177--184.

Digital Library

[42]

Nancy Tye-Murray, Suzanne C Purdy, and George G Woodworth. 1992. Reported Use of Communication Strategies by SHHH MembersClient, Talker, and Situational Variables. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 35, 3 (1992), 708--717.

[43]

William G. Vicars. 2016. Is being Deaf a disability? (2016). http://www.lifeprint.com/asl101/topics/ disability-deafness.htm Last accessed: 2016 - 08- 09.

[44]

Christian Vogler, Paula Tucker, and Norman Williams. 2013. Mixed Local and Remote Participation in Teleconferences from a Deaf and Hard of Hearing Perspective. In Proceedings of the 15th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS '13). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 30, 5 pages.

Digital Library

[45]

Kimberly A. Weaver and Thad Starner. 2011. We Need to Communicate!: Helping Hearing Parents of Deaf Children Learn American Sign Language. In The Proceedings of the 13th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS '11). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 91--98.

Digital Library

[46]

Kimberly A. Weaver, Thad Starner, and Harley Hamilton. 2010. An Evaluation of Video Intelligibility for Novice American Sign Language Learners on a Mobile Device. In Proceedings of the 12th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS '10). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 107--114.

Digital Library

Cited By

Bahçekapılı EAyaz A(2024)Assessing the Impact of Assistive Technologies on the Lives of the Hearing Impaired: A Bibliometric AnalysisTransforming Media Accessibility in Europe10.1007/978-3-031-60049-4_19(337-356)Online publication date: 20-Aug-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-60049-4_19
Davis JWang HChilana PYang X(2023)"It's Not an Issue of Malice, but of Ignorance"Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies10.1145/36109017:3(1-31)Online publication date: 27-Sep-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3610901
Huang SLi XShi SDong HCai XJin KWu JLin WYao JHu YYing FYao C(2023)Silent Delivery: Make Instant Delivery More Accessible for the DHH Delivery Workers Through Sensory SubstitutionDistributed, Ambient and Pervasive Interactions10.1007/978-3-031-34609-5_27(362-379)Online publication date: 9-Jul-2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-34609-5_27
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

The Impact of Assistive Technology on Communication Quality Between Deaf and Hearing Individuals
1. Social and professional topics

Recommendations

What Factors Motivate Culturally Deaf People to Want Assistive Technologies?
CHI EA '24: Extended Abstracts of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
Assistive technologies see high rates of rejection, especially in Deaf communities, due to barriers including cost, discomfort, acclimatization periods, lack of aesthetic appeal, visibility of technology and/or disability, misalignment with user’s ...
Deaf and Hard of Hearing Individuals' Perceptions of Communication with Hearing Colleagues in Small Groups
ASSETS '16: Proceedings of the 18th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility

This survey-based study investigated deaf and hard of hearing (DHH) individuals' perceived need for technologies that may facilitate communication when meeting in small groups with hearing colleagues. Participants were 108 DHH postsecondary students who ...
ProSign Everywhere - Addressing Communication Empowerment Goals for Deaf People
GoodTechs '19: Proceedings of the 5th EAI International Conference on Smart Objects and Technologies for Social Good

Sign language is recognized as one of the most popular means of communication for deaf people. Unfortunately, the knowledge of sign language by hearing people is not widespread and this may pose unpleasant barriers between deaf and their surrounding ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

CSCW '17: Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing

February 2017

2556 pages

ISBN:9781450343350

DOI:10.1145/2998181

General Chairs:
Charlotte P. Lee
University of Washington
,
Steve Poltrock
Retired
,
Program Chairs:
Louise Barkhuus
Stockholm University and Cornell Tech
,
Marcos Borges
Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro
,
Wendy Kellogg
IBM T.J. Watson Research Center

Copyright © 2017 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]

Sponsors

SIGCHI: ACM Special Interest Group on Computer-Human Interaction

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 25 February 2017

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Conference

CSCW '17

Sponsor:

SIGCHI

CSCW '17: Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing

February 25 - March 1, 2017

Oregon, Portland, USA

Acceptance Rates

CSCW '17 Paper Acceptance Rate 183 of 530 submissions, 35%;

Overall Acceptance Rate 2,235 of 8,521 submissions, 26%

Upcoming Conference

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

27
Total Citations
View Citations
1,156
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)196
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)10

Reflects downloads up to 03 Sep 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Bahçekapılı EAyaz A(2024)Assessing the Impact of Assistive Technologies on the Lives of the Hearing Impaired: A Bibliometric AnalysisTransforming Media Accessibility in Europe10.1007/978-3-031-60049-4_19(337-356)Online publication date: 20-Aug-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-60049-4_19
Davis JWang HChilana PYang X(2023)"It's Not an Issue of Malice, but of Ignorance"Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies10.1145/36109017:3(1-31)Online publication date: 27-Sep-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3610901
Huang SLi XShi SDong HCai XJin KWu JLin WYao JHu YYing FYao C(2023)Silent Delivery: Make Instant Delivery More Accessible for the DHH Delivery Workers Through Sensory SubstitutionDistributed, Ambient and Pervasive Interactions10.1007/978-3-031-34609-5_27(362-379)Online publication date: 9-Jul-2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-34609-5_27
Obidat A(2022)Bibliometric Analysis of Global Scientific Literature on the Accessibility of an Integrated E-Learning Model for Students with DisabilitiesContemporary Educational Technology10.30935/cedtech/1206414:3(ep374)Online publication date: 2022
https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/12064
Prietch SSánchez JGuerrero J(2022)A Systematic Review of User Studies as a Basis for the Design of Systems for Automatic Sign Language ProcessingACM Transactions on Accessible Computing10.1145/356339515:4(1-33)Online publication date: 11-Nov-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3563395
Faltaous SWinkler TSchneegass CGruenefeld USchneegass S(2022)Understanding Challenges and Opportunities of Technology-Supported Sign Language LearningProceedings of the Augmented Humans International Conference 202210.1145/3519391.3519396(15-25)Online publication date: 13-Mar-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3519391.3519396
Chang PTucker R(2022)Assistive Communication Technologies and Stigma: How Perceived Visibility of Cochlear Implants Affects Self-Stigma and Social Interaction AnxietyProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/35129246:CSCW1(1-16)Online publication date: 7-Apr-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3512924
Rui Xia Ang JLiu PMcDonnell ECoppola S(2022)“In this online environment, we're limited”:Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3491102.3517488(1-16)Online publication date: 29-Apr-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3491102.3517488
Seita MLee SAndrew SShinohara KHuenerfauth M(2022)Remotely Co-Designing Features for Communication Applications using Automatic Captioning with Deaf and Hearing PairsProceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3491102.3501843(1-13)Online publication date: 29-Apr-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3491102.3501843
Luo LWeng DSongrui GHao JTu Z(2022)Avatar Interpreter: Improving Classroom Experiences for Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing People Based on Augmented RealityExtended Abstracts of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3491101.3519799(1-5)Online publication date: 27-Apr-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3491101.3519799
Show More Cited By

View Options

Get Access

Login options

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

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents