Universal Access in the Information Society

, Volume 5, Issue 3, pp 306–324 | Cite as

Validation methods for an accessible user interface for a rehabilitation robot

  • Bernard Parsons
  • Anthony White
  • Peter Warner
  • Raj Gill


This paper describes the research methods required for the development and validation of a user interface for a wheelchair mounted manipulator for use by severely disabled persons. It explains the construction of the interface using tasks to define the user interface architecture. It outlines the experiments used to evaluate the user responses and draws conclusions about the effectiveness of the whole system. A systematic procedure is defined to obtain numerical estimates of the effectiveness of task analysis for individual use. This approach marries engineering procedures with a consideration of the human interaction. The prototype robot used several gesture recognition systems to achieve a better level of accessibility and usability than other robots used for rehabilitation at this time. Two different approaches to user interfaces were tested with different input devices.


  1. 1.
    Prior, S.D.: Investigations into the design of a wheelchair-mounted rehabilitation robotic manipulator. PhD Thesis, Middlesex University (1993)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hillman, M.: Rehabilitation robotics. Crit. Rev. Phys. Rehabil. Med. 4(1), 79–103 (1992)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kassler, M.: Introduction to the special issue on robotics for health care. Robotica 11, 493–494 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dallaway, J., Timmers, P.: Rehabilitation robotics in Europe. IEEE Trans. Rehabil. Eng. 3, 35–45 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mahoney, R.M.: Robotic products for rehabilitation: status and strategy. In: International Conference of Rehabilitation Robotics, Bath University, UK, pp. 12–17 (1997)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Parsons, B., Warner, P.R., White, A.S., Gill, R.: An adaptable user interface and controller for a rehabilitation robotic arm. In: International Conference on Advanced Robotics, CA, pp. 919–923 (1997)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Parsons, B.N., Warner, P.R., White, A., Gill, R.: Initial evaluation of the Middlesex rehabilitation robotic arm. In: Proceedings of the RESNA Conference, Pittsburgh, pp. 411–413 (1997)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Parsons, B.N.: The design and evaluation of an interface and control system for a scariculated rehabilitation robot arm. PhD Thesis, School of Engineering Systems, Middlesex University (2001)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sheridan, T.B.: Human supervisory control. In: Sage, A.P. and Rouse, W.B. (eds) Handbook of Systems Engineering and Management. Wiley, New York (1999)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Card, S.K., Moran, T.P., Newell, A.L. The Psychology of Human Computer Interaction. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, ISBN 0898 592 437 (1983)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Prior, S.D.: An electric wheelchair-mounted robotic arm—a survey of potential users. J. Med. Eng. Technol. 14(4), 143–154 (1990)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Grantham, K.H.P. Development of a blackboard system for robot programming. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Industrial and Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence and Expert Systems, Charleston, SC, USA, pp. 123–130 (1990)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jennings, N.R., Sycara, K., Wooldridge, M.: Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York (1998)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    McEachern, W., Perricos, C., Jackson, R.: Head gesture assisted direct control of a rehabilitation manipulation system. ICORR 94, Wilmington, Delaware, pp 49–54 (1994)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Harwin, W.S., Jackson, R.D.: Analysis of intentional head gestures to assist computer access by physically disabled people. J. Biomed. Eng. 12(3), 193–198 (1990)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Keates, S., Potter, R., Perricos, C., Robinson, P.: Gesture recognition—research and clinical perspectives. RESNA 97, 333–335, Arlington (1997)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Parsons, B.N., Gellrich, L., Warner, P.R., Gill, R., White, A.S.: Application of a gesture classification system to the control of a rehabilitation robotic manipulator. In: IEEE Conference on Engineering in Medicine and Biology, Amsterdam, ISBN 90 9010005 9 (CD ROM) (1996)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Tew, A.I., Gray, C.J.: A real-time gesture recognizer. J. Biomed. Eng. 15, 181–187 (1995)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hrycej, T.: Back to single layer learning principles. In: Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Neural Networks, Seattle (1991)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wassermann, P.D.: Neural Computing—Theory and Practice. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, ISBN 0 442 20743 3 (1989)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bishop, C.M.: Neural Networks for Pattern Recognition. Oxford University Press, Oxford, ISBN 0-19-853864-2 (1995)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Verburg, G., Kwee, H., Wisaksana, A., Cheetham, A., van Woerden, J.: Manus: The evolution of an assistive technology. Technol. Disabil. 5, 217–228 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Nielsen, J., Phillips, V.: Estimating the relative usability of two interfaces: heuristic, formal, and empirical methods compared. Hum. Factors Comput. Syst. Conf. Proc. 214–221 (1993)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Polson, P.G., Lewis, C., Rieman, J., Wharton, C.: Cognitive walkthroughs: a method for theory-based evaluation of user interfaces. Int. J. Man-Mach. Stud. 36, 741–73 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Neilson, J.: Usability Inspection Methods, Wiley, New York, pp. 5–6, ISBN 04710 187 75 (1994)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Demers, L., Weiss-Lambrou, R., Ska, B.: Development of the Quebec user evaluation of satisfaction with assistive technology. Assist. Technol. 8(1), 3–15 (1996)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kwee, H.H., Duimel, J.J.: The MANUS Wheelchair-Borne manipulator: developments towards a production model. In: Proceedings of the International Conference of the Association for the Advancement of Rehabilitation Technology, pp. 440–461, Montreal, June (1988)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Topping, M.: The development of HANDY 1 a robotic aid to independence for the severely disabled. In: Proceedings of the IEE Colloquium on Mechatronic Aids for the Disabled, University of Dundee, UK, Digest No. 1995/107, pp. 1–6 (1995)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kieras, D.E.: Towards a practical GOMS model methodology for user interface design. In: Helander, M (ed.) Handbook of Human Computer Interaction. Elsevier, Amsterdam, ISBN 0444 705 368 (1988)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bernard Parsons
    • 2
  • Anthony White
    • 1
  • Peter Warner
    • 1
  • Raj Gill
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Computing ScienceMiddlesex UniversityLondonUK
  2. 2.Becrypt LtdReadingUK

Personalised recommendations