Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluating choice in universal access: an example from rehabilitation robotics

  • Long Paper
  • Published:
Universal Access in the Information Society Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper describes a technique using dimensional analysis that so far has been rarely, if ever, used in studies of universal access. However, this procedure can produce a robust decision support process for inclusive designs. In this paper, it is applied to a case study of a wheelchair robot computer interface with choices in data input methods, addressing disparate requirements of different groups of intended users. The main underlying issue is to combine technical measurements, speed of operation and cost with subjective opinion. It turns out that Braglia’s method has greater robustness in determining rank compared to standard techniques. In this, case a simple switch was rated better than a mouse or voice operation for control.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

C :

Cost

DG:

Dimensionless group

F1:

Feature

PI:

Performance index

i :

Running index

n :

Number of variables

N c :

Non-dimensional cost

N i :

Non-dimensional value for ith rating of device j

S i :

Standard value of attribute i for device j

V i :

Value attributed to ith rating for device j

w i :

Weight i

W :

Sum of individual weights

X i :

Attribute i for device j

Y i :

Attibute i for different device

References

  1. Shneiderman, B., Plaisant, C.: Designing the User Interface, 4th edn. Pearson, New Jersey (2005)

  2. Gulliksen, J., Harker, S.: The software accessibility of human–computer interfaces-ISO Technical Specification 16071. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 3, 6–16 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Jacko, J., Hanson, V.: Universal access and inclusion in design. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 2, 1–2 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Eisma, R., Dickenson, A., Goodman, J., Syme, A., Tiwari, L., Newell, A.F.: Early user involvement in the development of information technology-related products for older people. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 3, 131–140 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Brajnik, G.: Comparing accessibility evaluation tools: a method for tool effectiveness. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 3, 252–263 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Emiliani, P.L., Stephanidis, C.: Universal access to ambient intelligent environments: opportunities and challenges for people with disabilities. IBM J. 44(3), 605–619 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Stephanidis, C., Savidis, A.: Universal access in the information society: methods, tools and interaction technologies. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 1(1), 40–55 (2001). (Managing Editor: Reinhard Oppermann, GMD, Germany)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Stephanidis, C.: Adaptive techniques for universal access. User modell. User Adapt. Interac. Int. J. 11(1/2), 159–179 (2001)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Braglia, M., Gabbrielli, R.: Dimensional analysis for investment selection in industrial robots. Int. J. Prod. Res. 38(18), 4843–4848 (2000)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Wickens, C.D., Lee, J.D., Lui, Y., Gordon Becker, S.: An Introduction to Human Factors Engineering, 2nd edn. Pearson, New Jersey (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Bates, R., Istance, H.O.: Why are eye mice unpopular? A detailed comparison of head and eye controlled assistive technology pointing devices. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 2, 280–290 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Parsons, B., White, A.S., Warner, P.: Validation methods for an accessible user interface for a rehabilitation robot, UAIS, vol. 5(3), October, pp. 306–324. ISSN 1615–5289 (2006)

  13. Sears, A., Lin, M., Karimullah, A.S.: Speech-based cursor control: understanding the effects of target size, cursor speed, and command selection. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 2, 30–43 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. De St, Q., Isaacson, E.M.: Dimensional Methods in Engineering and Physics. Edward Arnold, London (1975)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Rayleigh, (Lord), J. W. S.: On the viscosity of argon as affected by temperature. Proc. R. Soc. LXVI, pp. 68–74 (1899)

  16. Buckingham, E.: On physically similar systems: illustrations of the use of dimensional equations. Phys. Rev. IV(4), 418–432 (1914)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Langhaar, H.L.: Dimensional Analysis and Theory of Models. Wiley, London (1967)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Staicu, C.I.: General dimensional analysis. J. Franklin Inst. 292(6), 433–439 (1971)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  19. Parsons, B.N.: The design and evaluation of an interface and control system for a scariculated rehabilitation robot arm. Ph.D Thesis, School of Engineering Systems, Middlesex University (2001)

  20. Prior, S.D.: An electric wheelchair-mounted robotic arm—a survey of potential users. J. Med. Eng. Technol. 14(4), 143–154 (1990)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Goh, C., Tung, Y.A., Cheng, C.: A revised weighted sum decision model for robot selection. Comp. Ind. Eng. 30(2), 193–199 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Engineering and Information Sciences, Middlesex University, The Burroughs, London, NW4 4BT, UK

    A. S. White, R. Adams & S. Prior

Authors
  1. A. S. White
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. R. Adams
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. S. Prior
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. S. White.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

White, A.S., Adams, R. & Prior, S. Evaluating choice in universal access: an example from rehabilitation robotics. Univ Access Inf Soc 8, 155–163 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-008-0140-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-008-0140-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation