The Design of a Smartphone Camera Lens-based Application to Simplify the Lives of Those With Visual or Cognitive Impairments 

In a study conducted by M. Braun, M. Wölfel, G. Renner and C. Menschik, researchers examined interfaces and how accessible they were to those with various disabilities. This research primarily focused on interfaces and accessibility for people with disabilities (they refer to them as PWD’s). The researchers primary question was “to what extent the class of ‘natural’ user interfaces-including touch, voice and touchless are accessible to people with intellectual and possibly motor disabilities.” They focused on three main types of interfaces commonly used by the PWD community: touch interfaces, voice-commanded interfaces, and touchless interfaces. For each type, the researchers detailed the extent at which each of these interfaces are currently used by PWD, how they are used, and the experience users commonly have while interacting with each type of control.These interfaces have been adjusted for accessibility. An important note the researchers touched on was that accessibility settings that can be adjusted by the user are difficult for PWD to adjust without the help of a non-PWD user, which is counterintuitive when trying to design accessible user interfaces. “Participants were recruited from three different institutions in Germany. The majority of the participants (76.9%) lived in residential groups in facilities. Individual, less restricted participants (23.1%) lived in outpatient residential groups (also part of facilities). They observed a total of 91 participants using one of the three interfaces. The age of the participants ranged from 31 to 79 years.” To gather data, they used a Questionnaire for Observing Communicative Skills Revision (OCS-R), as this is a style of questionnaire specifically for caregivers PWD’s. It is “a structured diagnostic observation instrument for assessing communicative abilities and forms of expression of children, adolescents, and adults with limitations in their communicative abilities or their communicative development.” For the questionnaire, they asked questions regarding interaction, perception, and motor skills of the participants. Additionally, they used observational studies with a variety of tasks using the three types of control. Through the observational studies, they observed participants attempt to complete tasks with touch, voice, or touchless interfaces. The researchers highlighted that this data cannot be comprehensive because of its nature, and can be applied to individual cases. The results show that the three interface types are accessible to some people with disabilities, but the majority faces major problems while using them. In order to make current interface types usable for people with any level of knowledge or ability, accessibility or universal design decisions can be made in the development process to further the usability of products. 

In a study done by Janebäck, J., & Jonsson, E., researchers examined the development and prototype testing of a smartphone application specifically for those with disabilities. This research primarily focused on a user study and prototype of a smartphone application interface for an application that is to promote independence in everyday life for the target group, which was a group with cognitive impairments. The research question of this project was: “What should be considered when designing a UI for people with cognitive disability? (Jäneback, vi).” The researchers held user-testing, based on a prototype developed in Figma. Once developed and tested, the researchers found new information that pointed to what worked better on the smartphone application for the target group. For the interviews, the researchers held semi-structured interviews and group interviews. The participants were 15-20 people who were recruited; the participants were measured at different levels of function, different ages (approximately 18-60) and were noted to have different levels of cognitive ability. Some individual questions were as follows: “What are your thoughts about the fact that there is an app coming up? Do you use apps on your phone frequently? Is there any app you find difficult to use? What makes it difficult? Is there anything else you want to mention about the coming application? (Jäneback, 27).” Some group interview questions were as follows: “What is the first thing you think about when we say "Grunden’s new application" ? Name one function you would like the application to have. What is of highest importance regarding the application? When would you like to use the application? (in what situation)? Name one good and one bad application (Jäneback, 27).” As a result of interview findings, prior knowledge of accessibility, and WCAG standards, the researchers developed custom prototypes that met the specific functions of the needs identified by their research. The main functionality of the application was for users to easily find activities that cater to their interests and to make an independent and active lifestyle seem more appealing and achievable to the user group. The researchers also kept in mind common usability standards, including to “Use a contrast ratio for text and pictures of at least 4.5:1 to assure accessibility; Have a minimum touch target of at least 9x9 mm to facilitate interaction for people with impaired motor skills; Use standard icons and symbols to help with memory and recognition since people tend to link a specific symbol to an action of function (Jäneback, 63).”