Mobility Technologies for Blind, Partially Sighted and Deafblind People: Design Issues

  • M. A. HershEmail author


The chapter provides an overview of the factors to be considered in the design of travel aids which meet the needs of blind, visually impaired and deafblind people. The chapter consists of two main parts. The first part comprises an introduction, brief discussions of the long cane as a successful travel aid (with limitations) and how blind people travel; a categorisation of travel aids and an overview of the three main phases of travel aid development. The second part considers the specifics of good design practice. The topics covered include specific principles of good design practice, app design, end-user involvement and particular features, including functionality, the interface, sensors, privacy and context awareness.


Number of blind people Low usage of mobility devices Long cane features Sensory information Shore lines Travel aid categorisation Travel aid development Obstacle avoidance devices Cane-based devices Robotic devices Global navigation satellite systems Environmental information beacons Mobile apps Device acceptance Device abandonment Factors that affect cane use Good design practice End-user factors Design features Design approach Training App design Additional information needs Mobility apps Cognitive load Interface design Accessible input Speech input Speech output Vibro-tactile output Privacy Context aware User-centred design End-user involvement Blind end-users Device evaluation Safety 


  1. 1.
    Abowd GD, Dey AK (2000) Towards a better understanding of context and context-awareness. In: Proceedings of CHI workshop on the what, who, where, when and how of context-awareness, The Hague, NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Amemiya T, Yamashita J, Hirota K, Hirose M (2004). Virtual leading blocks for the deaf-blind: a real-time way-finder by verbal-nonverbal hybrid interface and high-density RFID tag space. In: Virtual Reality, 2004. Proceedings. IEEE, pp 165–287Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Andò B (2003) Electronic sensory systems for the visually impaired. Instrum Meas Mag IEEE 6(2):62–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Arditi A, Tian Y (2013) User interface preferences in the design of a camera-based navigation and wayfinding aid. J Visual Impair Blind 107(2):18–129Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Baldauf, Dustdar MS, Rosenberg F (2007) A survey on context-aware systems. Int J Ad Hoc and Ubiquit Comput 7(4):263–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Batavia AI, Hammer GS (1990) Toward the development of consumer-based criteria for the evaluation of assistive devices. J Rehabil Res Dev 27(4):425–436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Benjamin JM, Ali NA, Schepis AF (1973) A laser cane for the blind. Proc San Diego Biomed Symp 12:53–57Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Blasch BB, Long RG, Griffin-Shirley N (1989) National evaluation of electronic travel aids for blind and visually impaired individuals: implications for design, RESNA 12th annual conference. Louisiana, New Orleans, pp 133–134Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bourbakis N (2008) Sensing surrounding 3-D space for navigation of the blind. Eng Med Biol Mag IEEE 27(1):49–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Brabyn J, Crandall W, Gerrey W (1993) Talking signs: a remote signage, solution for the blind, visually impaired and reading disabled. In: Annual international conference of the IEEE engineering in medicine and biology society, pp 1309–1310Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bradley N, Dunlop M (2008) Navigation AT: context-aware computing. In: Hersh MA, Johnson MA (eds) Assistive technology for visually impaired and blind people, Springer, Berlin, pp 231–260. ISBN 978-1-84628-866-1Google Scholar
  12. 12.
  13. 13.
    Brooks NA, Hoyer, EA (1989) Consumer evaluation of assistive devices. In: Proceedings of the 12th annual conference of the rehabilitation engineering society of North America, pp 358–359Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bruce I, McKennell AC, Walker EC (1991) Blind and partially sighted adults in Britain: the RNIB survey, Vol. 1. HM Stationery Office, UK, p 120Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Buurman RD (1997) User-centred design of smart products. Ergonomics 40(10):1159–1169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    CEN (2003) [internet] CEN workshop agreement CWA 14661. Guidelines to standardisers of ICT products and services in the CEN ICT domain. [cited 2010 Aug 12]. Available from:
  17. 17.
    Chen H (2004) An intelligent broker architecture for pervasive context-aware systems. PhD Thesis, University of Maryland, BaltimoreGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chen HE, Lin YY, Chen CH, Wang I (2015) BlindNavi: a navigation app for the visually impaired smartphone user. In: Proceedings of the 33rd annual ACM conference extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems, pp 19–24Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Clark-Carter DD, Heyes AD, Howarth CI (1986) The efficiency and walking speed of visually impaired people. Ergonomics 29(6):779–789CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    De Choudhury M, Feldman M, Amer-Yahia S, Golbandi N, Lempel R, Yu C (2010) Automatic construction of travel itineraries using social breadcrumbs. In: Proceedings of the 21st ACM conference on hypertext and hypermedia, ACM Press, New York, pp 35–44Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Dem. UP (1994) Demographics update. J Vis Impairment Blindness, 88(part 2(1)):4–5Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Dey AK, Abowd GD, Salber D (2001) A conceptual framework and a toolkit for supporting the rapid prototyping of context-aware applications. Hum Comput Interact 16(2):97–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Dvir D, Raz T, Shenhar AJ (2003) An empirical analysis of the relationship between project planning and project success. Int J Project Manage 21:82–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Farcy R (2006) Electronic travel aids and electronic orientation aids for blind people: technical, rehabilitation and everyday life points of vie. In: CVHI 2006. Kufstein, AustriaGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Farmer LW, Smith DL (1997) Adaptive technology. In: Blasch BB, Wiener WR, Welsh RL (eds) Foundations of orientation and mobility, 2nd Edn. pp 231–259Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    GD (2006), website for Guide Dogs New South Wales, Australia
  27. 27.
  28. 28.
    Gaunet F, Briffault X (2005) Exploring the functional specifications of a localized wayfinding verbal aid for blind pedestrians: Simple and structured urban areas. Hum Comput Interact 20(3):267–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Gitlin LN (1995) Why older people accept or reject assistive technology. Generations 19(1):41–46Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Giudice NA, Legge GE (2008) Blind navigation and the role of technology. In: Engineering handbook of smart technology for aging, disability, and independence, pp 479–500Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Golledge RG (1993) Geography and the disabled: a survey with special reference to vision impaired and blind populations. In: Transactions of the institute of British geographers, pp 63–85Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Gould JD, Lewis C (1985) Designing for usability: key principles and what designers think. Commun ACM 28:300–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Gurkan GK, Akan A (2013) VibroCap: a mobility supporting hat for blind. In: Electrical and electronics engineering (ELECO), 2013 8th international conference on, pp 367–370Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Harrison R, Flood D, Duce D (2013) Usability of mobile applications: literature review and rationale for a new usability model. J Interact Sci 1(1):1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Hersh MA (2009) Designing assistive technology to support independent travel for blind and visually impaired people CVHI’09. Wrocław, PolandGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Hersh MA (2014) Deafblind people stigma and the use of communication and mobility assistive devices. Technol Disabil 25(4):245–261Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Hersh MA (2015) Cane use and late onset visual impairment. Technol Disabil 27(3):103–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Hersh MA, Johnson MA (2006) Accessibility of PDF documents. AXMEDIS, LeedsGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Hersh MA, Johnson MA (2010) A robotic guide for blind people part 1: a multi-national survey of the attitudes, requirements and preferences of potential end-users. Appl Bion Biomech 7(4):277–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Hersh MA, Johnson MA (2012) A robotic guide for blind people part 2. Appl Bion Biomech 9:29–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Hersh MA (2009b) The application of information and other technologies to improve the mobility of blind, visually impaired and deafblind people, travel health informatics and telehealth. In: Mihalaş G et. al. (eds) Selected papers from EFMI special topic conference, Antalya, Turkey, Victor Babes University Publishing House, pp 11–24Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Hersh MA (2010) The design and evaluation of assistive technology products and devices part 1: design. Int Encycl Rehabil. Available online:
  43. 43.
    Hersh MA (2011) Participative research with diverse end-user groups: multi-language, multi-country blind and visually impaired people. In: 18th IFAC congress, Milan, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Hersh MA (2016) Travel and information processing by blind people: a new three-component model. Biomed Eng, University of Glasgow Report,
  45. 45.
    Hersh MA, Johnson MA (eds) (2008) Mobility: an overview. In: Assistive technology for visually impaired and blind people, Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Heyes A (1993) Sonic pathfinder training manual. Royal Guide Dog Association of Australia, Kew, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Hill EW, Rieser JJ, Hill MM, Hill M (1993) How persons with visual impairments explore novel spaces: strategies of good and poor performers. J Vis Impair Blind 87(8)Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Holland S, Morse DR, Gedenryd H (2002) AudioGPS: spatial audio navigation with a minimal attention interface. Pers Ubiquit Comput 6(4):253–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Hoyle B, Dodds S (2006) The ultracane® mobility aid at work training programmes to case studies. CVHI, Kufstein, AustriaGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Hoyle B, Waters D (2008) Mobility at: the batcane (ultracane). In: Hersh MA, Johnson MA (eds) Assistive technology for visually impaired and blind people, Springer, London, pp 209–229Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    IDC (2015) Smartphone OS market share, 2015 Q2., Accessed 7.6.2–16
  52. 52.
    Jacobson W (1979) Complementary travel aids for the blind person: the sonic guide used with a dog guide. J Vis Impair Blind 73(1):10–12Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Jacobson RD, Kitchin R (1997) GIS and people with visual impairments or blindness: Exploring the potential for education, orientation, and navigation. Trans GIS 2(4):315–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Joorabchi ME, Mesbah A, Kruchten P (2013) Real challenges in mobile app development. In: Empirical software engineering and measurement, 2013 ACM/IEEE international symposium on, pp 15–24Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Kalloniatis C, Kavakli E, Gritzalis S (2008) Addressing privacy requirements in system design: the PriS method. Requirements Eng 13(3):241–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Kane SK, Jayant C, Wobbrock JO, Ladner RE (2009). Freedom to roam: a study of mobile device adoption and accessibility for people with visual and motor disabilities. In: Proceedings of the 11th international ACM SIGACCESS conference on computers and accessibility, pp 115–122Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Kannan B, Kothari N, Gnegy C, Gedaway H, Dias MF, Dias MB (2014) Localization, route planning, and smartphone interface for indoor navigation. In: Cooperative robots and sensor networks, Springer, Berlin, pp 39–59Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Katz BF, Kammoun S, Parseihian G, Gutierrez O, Brilhault A, Auvray M, Jouffrais C (2012) NAVIG: augmented reality guidance system for the visually impaired. Virtual Reality 16(4):253–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Kay L (1974) A sonar aid to enhance spatial perception of the blind: Engineering design and evaluation. Radio Electron Eng 44(11):605–627CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Kay L (1980) The sonic guide, long cane and dog guide: their compatibility. J Vis Impair Blind 75(7):277–280Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Kendell C, Lemaire ED (2009) Effect of mobility devices on orientation sensors that contain magnetometers. J Rehabil Res Dev 46(7):957–962CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Kukulska-Hulme A (2007) Mobile usability in educational contexts: what have we learnt! Int Rev Res Open Distance Learn 8(2)Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Kumar A, Patra R, Manjunatha M, Mukhopadhyay J, Majumdar AK (2011) An electronic travel aid for navigation of visually impaired persons. In: Communication systems and networks (COMSNETS), 2011 third international conference on, pp 1–5Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Leduc-Mills B, Profita H, Bharadwaj S, Cromer P (2013) ioCane: a smart-phone and sensor-augmented mobility aid for the blindGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Lin Q, Han Y (2014) A context-aware-based audio guidance system for blind people using a multimodal profile model. Sensors 14(10):18670–18700CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Marston J, Barlow J, Bentzen B, Brabyn J, Gilden D, Miele J, Myer L, Scott A, Simon H (2009) Considerations in designing research to evaluate wayfinding. In: CVHI 2009, Wroclaw, PolandGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    McGorry S (2000) Measurement in a cross-cultural environment: survey translation issues. Qual Mark Res Int J 3(2):74–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Mims III FM (1972) Eyeglass mounted mobility aid. J Am Optom Asso 673–676Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Mishra A, Jain A, Pamecha N (2014) Smart travel alarm–an iOS app on sencha 2.2. Int J Eng Manage Sci 1(7)Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    NR (2006), website of Nurion-Raycal, Station Square Building 2, Suite B, Paoli, PA 1930I, USA
  71. 71.
    Nayebi F, Desharnais JM, Abran A (2012) The state of the art of mobile application usability evaluation. In: CCECE, pp 1–4Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Parette HP, Huer MB, Scherer M (2004) Effects of acculturation on assistive technology service delivery. J Spec Ed Tech 19(2):31–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Park N (2011) Implementation of terminal middleware platform for mobile RFID computing. Int J Ad Hoc Ubiquitous Comput 8(4):205–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Park N (2010) Security scheme for managing a large quantity of individual information in RFID environment. In: Information computing and applications. Springer, Berlin, pp 72–79Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Pascolini D, Mariotti SP (2011) Global estimates of visual impairment: 2010. Br J Ophthalmol: bjophthalmol-2011Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Patel I, Turano KA, Broman AT, Bandeen-Roche K, Munoz B, West SK (2006) Measures of visual function and percentage of preferred walking speed in older adults: the salisbury eye evaluation project. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 47(1):65–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Phillips B, Zhao H (1993) Predictors of assistive technology abandonment. Assistive Technol 5(1):36–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Pissaloux E (2013) Visually impaired mobility and ICT supports. In: IEEE signal processing: algorithms, architectures, arrangements, and applications (SPA). ISSN 2326–0262Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Pissaloux E, Velazquez R, Hersh M, Uzan G (2016) Towards a cognitive model of human mobility: an investigation of tactile perception for use in mobility devices. J Navig (in press)Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Raento M, Oulasvirta A, Petit R, Toivonen H (2005) ContextPhone: a prototyping platform for context-aware mobile applications. Pervasive Comput IEEE 4(2):51–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Rieback MR, Crispo B, Tanenbaum AS (2005). RFID guardian: a battery-powered mobile device for RFID privacy management. In: Information security and privacy, Springer, Berlin, pp 184–194Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Rodgers M, Emerson R (2005) Materials testing in long cane design: sensitivity, flexibility, and transmission of vibration. J Vis Impair Blind 99(11):696–706Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Roentgen UR, Gelderblom GJ, Soede M, de Witte LP (2008) Inventory of electronic mobility aids for persons with visual impairments: a literature review. J Vis Impair Blind 102(11):702Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Rudolph (undated) Hybrid mobile apps: providing a native experience with web technologies., Accessed 19 May 2016
  85. 85.
    Russell L (1966) Travel Pathsounder and evaluation, In Dutton R (Ed) In: Proceedings conference on the evaluation of sensory devices for the blind, St. Dunstan’s, London, pp 293–297Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    Salber D, Dey AK, Abowd GD (1999) The context toolkit: aiding the development of context-enabled applications In: Proceedings of CHI’99, ACM Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Scherer MJ (2002) Editorial, the change in emphasis from people to person. Introduction to the special issue on assistive technology. Disabil Rehabil 24:1–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Skulimowski P, Strumillo P (2007) Obstacle localization in 3D scenes from stereoscopic sequences. In: signal processing conference, 2007 15th European, pp 2095–2099Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    Strumillo P (2010) Electronic interfaces aiding the visually impaired in environmental access, mobility and navigation. In: Human system interactions (HSI), 2010 3rd conference on, pp 17–24Google Scholar
  90. 90.
    Terlau T (2008) ‘K’ sonar curriculum handbook. American Printing House for the Blind, Inc., USAGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    UC (2006) UltraCaneTM., Sound Foresight Ltd, UK
  92. 92.
    Ulrich I, Borenstein J (2001) The GuideCane-applying mobile robot technologies to assist the visually impaired. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part A 31(2):131–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Walraven J (1986) Ergonomics, mechanics and functional aspects of the long cane. In: Development of electronic aids for the visually impaired, Springer, Netherlands, pp 275–286Google Scholar
  94. 94.
    Ward C (1990) Design for all: consumer needs assessment project year 2. Results of the second year of a five year study, 45pGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Winograd T (2001) Architectures for context. Hum Comput Interact J 16(2):401–409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Yusro M, et al. (2013) SEES: concept and design of a smart environment explorer stick. In: IEEE HSI 2013Google Scholar
  97. 97.
    Zhang D, Adipat B (2005) Challenges, methodologies, and issues in the usability testing of mobile applications. Int J Hum Comput Interact 18(3):293–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Biomedical EngineeringUniversity of GlasgowGlasgowScotland, UK

Personalised recommendations