8,026 research outputs found

    Fall Prediction and Prevention Systems: Recent Trends, Challenges, and Future Research Directions.

    Get PDF
    Fall prediction is a multifaceted problem that involves complex interactions between physiological, behavioral, and environmental factors. Existing fall detection and prediction systems mainly focus on physiological factors such as gait, vision, and cognition, and do not address the multifactorial nature of falls. In addition, these systems lack efficient user interfaces and feedback for preventing future falls. Recent advances in internet of things (IoT) and mobile technologies offer ample opportunities for integrating contextual information about patient behavior and environment along with physiological health data for predicting falls. This article reviews the state-of-the-art in fall detection and prediction systems. It also describes the challenges, limitations, and future directions in the design and implementation of effective fall prediction and prevention systems

    Fall prevention intervention technologies: A conceptual framework and survey of the state of the art

    Get PDF
    In recent years, an ever increasing range of technology-based applications have been developed with the goal of assisting in the delivery of more effective and efficient fall prevention interventions. Whilst there have been a number of studies that have surveyed technologies for a particular sub-domain of fall prevention, there is no existing research which surveys the full spectrum of falls prevention interventions and characterises the range of technologies that have augmented this landscape. This study presents a conceptual framework and survey of the state of the art of technology-based fall prevention systems which is derived from a systematic template analysis of studies presented in contemporary research literature. The framework proposes four broad categories of fall prevention intervention system: Pre-fall prevention; Post-fall prevention; Fall injury prevention; Cross-fall prevention. Other categories include, Application type, Technology deployment platform, Information sources, Deployment environment, User interface type, and Collaborative function. After presenting the conceptual framework, a detailed survey of the state of the art is presented as a function of the proposed framework. A number of research challenges emerge as a result of surveying the research literature, which include a need for: new systems that focus on overcoming extrinsic falls risk factors; systems that support the environmental risk assessment process; systems that enable patients and practitioners to develop more collaborative relationships and engage in shared decision making during falls risk assessment and prevention activities. In response to these challenges, recommendations and future research directions are proposed to overcome each respective challenge.The Royal Society, grant Ref: RG13082

    Daily Stress Recognition from Mobile Phone Data, Weather Conditions and Individual Traits

    Full text link
    Research has proven that stress reduces quality of life and causes many diseases. For this reason, several researchers devised stress detection systems based on physiological parameters. However, these systems require that obtrusive sensors are continuously carried by the user. In our paper, we propose an alternative approach providing evidence that daily stress can be reliably recognized based on behavioral metrics, derived from the user's mobile phone activity and from additional indicators, such as the weather conditions (data pertaining to transitory properties of the environment) and the personality traits (data concerning permanent dispositions of individuals). Our multifactorial statistical model, which is person-independent, obtains the accuracy score of 72.28% for a 2-class daily stress recognition problem. The model is efficient to implement for most of multimedia applications due to highly reduced low-dimensional feature space (32d). Moreover, we identify and discuss the indicators which have strong predictive power.Comment: ACM Multimedia 2014, November 3-7, 2014, Orlando, Florida, US

    Future bathroom: A study of user-centred design principles affecting usability, safety and satisfaction in bathrooms for people living with disabilities

    Get PDF
    Research and development work relating to assistive technology 2010-11 (Department of Health) Presented to Parliament pursuant to Section 22 of the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 197

    Experiences of in-home evaluation of independent living technologies for older adults

    Get PDF
    Evaluating home-based independent living technologies for older adults is essential. Whilst older adults are a diverse group with a range of computing experiences, it is likely that many of this user group may have little experience with technology and may be challenged with age-related impairments that can further impact upon their interaction with technology. However, the evaluation life cycle of independent living technologies does not only involve usability testing of such technologies in the home. It must also consider the evaluation of the older adultโ€™s living space to ensure technologies can be easily integrated into their homes and daily routines. Assessing the impact of these technologies on older adults is equally critical as they can only be successful if older adults are willing to accept and adopt them. In this paper we present three case studies that illustrate the evaluation life cycle of independent living technologies within TRIL, which include ethnographic assessment of participant attitudes and expectations, evaluation of the living space prior to the deployment of any technology, to the final evaluation of usability and participant perspectives

    ์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์„ ๋Œ€์ƒ์œผ๋กœ ํ•œ ์Œ์„ฑ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž ์ธํ„ฐํŽ˜์ด์Šค์˜ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž ๊ฒฝํ—˜์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž ์ค‘์‹ฌ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ: ์ง€๋Šฅํ˜• ๊ฐœ์ธ ๋น„์„œ๋ฅผ ์ค‘์‹ฌ์œผ๋กœ

    Get PDF
    ํ•™์œ„๋…ผ๋ฌธ (๋ฐ•์‚ฌ) -- ์„œ์šธ๋Œ€ํ•™๊ต ๋Œ€ํ•™์› : ์ธ๋ฌธ๋Œ€ํ•™ ํ˜‘๋™๊ณผ์ • ์ธ์ง€๊ณผํ•™์ „๊ณต, 2021. 2. ์œค๋ช…ํ™˜.In recent years, research on Voice User Interfaces (VUIs) has been actively conducted. The VUI has many advantages which can be very useful for the general public as well as for elderly people and people with disabilities. The VUI is considered very suitable for individuals with disabilities to promote universal access to information, decreasing the gap between users with non-disabilities and users with disabilities. In this respect, many researchers have been trying to apply the VUI to various areas for people with disabilities to increase their independence and quality of life. However, previous studies related to VUIs for people with disabilities usually focused on developments and evaluations of new systems, and empirical studies are limited. There have been a few studies related to User Experience (UX) of VUIs for people with disabilities. This situation is not different with studies related to Intelligent Personal Assistants (IPAs) which one of the most wildly being used VUIs nowadays. Although IPAs have potential to be practically used for users with disabilities because they can perform various tasks than simple VUIs, research related to UX of IPAs for them has been paid little attention to, only focusing on a young adult and middle-aged group among people with non-disabilities as end-users. Many previous studies referred to that IPAs would be helpful to people with disabilities. However, only a few studies related to IPAs have been conducted from the angle of users with disabilities, especially in terms of UX. It is known for that investigating usability and UX for users with disabilities is more difficult and delicate than that of users with non-disabilities. It can be said that research on UX of IPAs for users with disabilities should be conducted more closely to understand their interactions with IPAs. The purpose of the research in this dissertation is to investigate UX of VUIs for users with disabilities, focusing on IPAs. The research in this dissertation consists of three independent main studies. Study 1 investigates UX of commercially available VUIs for users with disabilities, by examining acceptance, focusing on the differences between users with different types of disabilities and identifying the reasons why they use or not use VUIs. A questionnaire survey was conducted for users with disabilities having used one or more VUIs. The collected data were analyzed statistically and qualitatively. The results of this study show acceptance of VUIs and the relationships between the acceptance factors for users with disabilities, with some differences between users with different types of disabilities. The results of this study also provide some insights related to UX of VUIs for users with disabilities from their perspective, showing that the acceptance factors can be used as criteria in comprehending the issues. Study 2 investigates UX of IPAs based on online reviews written by users through semantic network analysis. Before investigating UX of IPAs for users with disabilities, important factors for UX of IPAs were proposed by investigating UX of IPAs for users with non-disabilities in this study. As a case study, online reviews on smart speakers from the internet were collected. Then, the collected text data were preprocessed and structured in which words having similar meaning were clustered into one representative keyword. After this, the frequency of the keywords was calculated, and keywords in top 50 frequency were used for the analysis, because they were considered core keywords. Based on the keywords, a network was visualized, and centrality was measured. The results of this study show that most of the users were satisfied with the use of IPAs, although they felt that the performance of them was not completely reliable. In addition, the results of this study show aesthetic aspects of IPAs are also important for usersโ€™ enjoyment, especially for the satisfaction of users. This study proposes eleven important factors to be considered for UX of IPAs and among them, suggests ten factors to be considered in the design of IPAs to improve UX of IPAs and to satisfy users. Study 3 investigates UX of IPAs for users with disabilities and identifies how the use of IPAs affects quality of life of them, based on Study 1 and Study 2. In this study, comparisons with users with non-disabilities are also conducted. A questionnaire survey and a written interview were conducted for users with disabilities and users with non-disabilities having used one or more smart speakers. The collected data were analyzed statistically and qualitatively. The results of this study show that, regardless of disability, most users are sharing the main UX of IPAs and can benefit the use of IPA. The results of this study also show that the investigation on qualitative data is essential to the study for users with disabilities, offering various insights related to UX of IPAs from the angle of them and clear differences in UX of IPAs between users with disabilities and users with non-disabilities. This study proposes important factors for UX of IPAs for users with disabilities and users with non-disabilities based on the discussed factors for UX of IPAs in Study 2. This study also discusses various design implications for UX of IPAs and provides three important design implications which should be considered to improve UX, focusing on the interaction design of IPAs for not only users with disabilities but also all potential users. Each study provides design implications. Study 1 discusses design implications for UX of VUIs for users with disabilities. Study 2 suggests design implications for UX of IPAs, focusing on users with non-disabilities. Study 3 discusses various design implications for UX of IPAs and proposes three specific implications focusing on the interaction design of IPAs for all potential users. It is possible to expect that reflecting the implications in the interaction design of IPA will be helpful to all potential users, not just users with disabilities.์ตœ๊ทผ์— ๋“ค์–ด์™€ ์Œ์„ฑ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž ์ธํ„ฐํŽ˜์ด์Šค๋“ค(Voice User Interfaces, VUIs)์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๊ฐ€ ํ™œ๋ฐœํžˆ ์ง„ํ–‰๋˜๊ณ  ์žˆ๋‹ค. VUI๋Š” ์ผ๋ฐ˜์ ์ธ ์‚ฌ๋žŒ๋“ค์€ ๋ฌผ๋ก , ๊ณ ๋ น์ž ๋ฐ ์žฅ์• ์ธ๋“ค์—๊ฒŒ๋„ ๋งค์šฐ ์œ ์šฉํ•œ ๋งŽ์€ ์žฅ์ ๋“ค์„ ๊ฐ€์ง€๊ณ  ์žˆ๋‹ค. VUI๋Š” ์žฅ์• ์ธ๋“ค์—๊ฒŒ ๋ณดํŽธ์  ์ •๋ณด ์ ‘๊ทผ์„ ์šฉ์ดํ•˜๊ฒŒ ํ•œ๋‹ค๋Š” ์ ์—์„œ ์žฅ์• ์ธ๊ณผ ๋น„์žฅ์• ์ธ ๊ฐ„ ์กด์žฌํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋Š” ์ •๋ณด ๊ฒฉ์ฐจ๋ฅผ ์ค„์ด๋Š” ๋งค์šฐ ์œ ์šฉํ•œ ์—ญํ• ์„ ํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋‹ค. ์ด๋Ÿฌํ•œ ๊ด€์ ์—์„œ, ๋งŽ์€ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์ž๋“ค์€ ์žฅ์• ์ธ๋“ค์˜ ๋…๋ฆฝ์„ฑ๊ณผ ์‚ถ์˜ ์งˆ์„ ๋†’์ด๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•ด VUI๋ฅผ ๋‹ค์–‘ํ•œ ์˜์—ญ์— ์ ์šฉํ•˜๋ ค๊ณ  ํ•˜๊ณ  ์žˆ๋‹ค. ํ•˜์ง€๋งŒ, ์žฅ์• ์ธ๋“ค์„ ์œ„ํ•œ VUIs์™€ ๊ด€๋ จ๋œ ์„ ํ–‰์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋“ค์€ ๋Œ€๋ถ€๋ถ„ ์ƒˆ๋กœ์šด ์‹œ์Šคํ…œ์˜ ๊ฐœ๋ฐœ ๋ฐ ํ‰๊ฐ€์— ์ค‘์ ์„ ๋‘๊ณ  ์žˆ์œผ๋ฉฐ ๊ฒฝํ—˜์  ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” ์ œํ•œ์ ์ด๋‹ค. ํŠนํžˆ, ์žฅ์• ์ธ์„ ์œ„ํ•œ VUIs์™€ ๊ด€๋ จ๋œ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋“ค ์ค‘ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๊ฒฝํ—˜(User Experience, UX)์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” ์ƒ๋‹นํžˆ ๋“œ๋ฌผ๋‹ค. ์ด๋Ÿฌํ•œ ์ƒํ™ฉ์€ ์˜ค๋Š˜๋‚  ๊ฐ€์žฅ ๋งŽ์ด ์‚ฌ์šฉ๋˜๋Š” VUIs ์ค‘ ํ•˜๋‚˜์ธ ์ง€๋Šฅํ˜• ๊ฐœ์ธ ๋น„์„œ๋“ค(Intelligent Personal Assistants, IPAs)์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์—์„œ๋„ ๋งˆ์ฐฌ๊ฐ€์ง€์ด๋‹ค. IPAs๋Š” ๋‹จ์ˆœํ•œ VUIs๋ณด๋‹ค ๋‹ค์–‘ํ•œ ์ž‘์—…์„ ์ˆ˜ํ–‰ํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๊ธฐ ๋•Œ๋ฌธ์— ์žฅ์• ๊ฐ€ ์žˆ๋Š” ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์—๊ฒŒ ๋งค์šฐ ์‹ค์šฉ์ ์œผ๋กœ ์‚ฌ์šฉ๋  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋‹ค. ํ•˜์ง€๋งŒ, IPAs์˜ UX ๊ด€๋ จ๋œ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” ๊ฑฐ์˜ ์ฃผ๋ชฉ๋ฐ›์ง€ ๋ชป ํ•˜๊ณ  ์žˆ์œผ๋ฉฐ, ๋น„์žฅ์• ์ธ ์ค‘ ์ฒญ๋…„ ๋ฐ ์ค‘๋…„์ธต๋งŒ์ด ์ตœ์ข… ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค๋กœ ๊ณ ๋ ค๋˜๊ณ  ์žˆ๋‹ค. ์ด์ „์˜ ๋งŽ์€ ์„ ํ–‰์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋“ค์€ IPAs๊ฐ€ ์žฅ์• ๊ฐ€ ์žˆ๋Š” ์‚ฌ๋žŒ๋“ค์—๊ฒŒ ํฐ ๋„์›€์ด ๋  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋‹ค๊ณ  ์ž…์„ ๋ชจ์•„ ๋งํ•œ๋‹ค. ๊ทธ๋Ÿฌ๋‚˜ ์‹ค์žฌ๋กœ ์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์˜ ์ž…์žฅ์—์„œ ์ง„ํ–‰๋œ IPAs์™€ ๊ด€๋ จ๋œ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” ๋ณ„๋กœ ์—†์œผ๋ฉฐ IPAs์˜ UX ๊ด€๋ จ๋œ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” ๋”์šฑ ๋ถ€์กฑํ•œ ์ƒํ™ฉ์ด๋‹ค. ๋น„์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค๊ณผ ๋น„๊ตํ–ˆ์„ ๋•Œ ์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์˜ ์ž…์žฅ์—์„œ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์„ฑ(usability) ๋ฐ UX๋ฅผ ์กฐ์‚ฌํ•˜๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์€ ๋ณต์žกํ•˜๊ณ  ์–ด๋ ค์šด ์ผ์ด๋‹ค. ๊ทธ๋ ‡๊ธฐ์— ์žฅ์• ๊ฐ€ ์žˆ๋Š” ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋ฅผ ์œ„ํ•œ IPAs์˜ UX์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๊ฐ€ ๋ณด๋‹ค ์ฒ ์ €ํžˆ ์ด๋ฃจ์–ด์ ธ์•ผ ํ•œ๋‹ค๊ณ  ๋ณผ ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋‹ค. ์ด๋Ÿฌํ•œ ๋ฐฐ๊ฒฝ์„ ๋‘๊ณ , ๋ณธ ํ•™์œ„๋…ผ๋ฌธ์˜ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ ๋ชฉ์ ์€ ์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์„ ๋Œ€์ƒ์œผ๋กœ IPAs์— ์ค‘์ ์„ ๋‘๊ณ  VUIs์˜ UX๋ฅผ ์กฐ์‚ฌํ•˜๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์ด๋‹ค. ๋ณธ ํ•™์œ„๋…ผ๋ฌธ์€ ํฌ๊ฒŒ ์„ธ ๊ฐœ์˜ ๋…๋ฆฝ์ ์ธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋กœ ์ด๋ฃจ์–ด์ ธ ์žˆ๋‹ค. ์—ฐ๊ตฌ 1์—์„œ๋Š” ๋‹ค๋ฅธ ์žฅ์• ๋ฅผ ๊ฐ€์ง€๊ณ  ์žˆ๋Š” ์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์˜ ์ฐจ์ด๋“ค๊ณผ ๊ทธ๋“ค์ด VUIs์„ ์‚ฌ์šฉํ•˜๊ฑฐ๋‚˜ ์‚ฌ์šฉํ•˜์ง€ ์•Š๋Š” ์ด์œ ๋ฅผ ํŒŒ์•…ํ•˜๋Š”๋ฐ ์ค‘์ ์„ ๋‘๊ณ , ์ƒ์šฉํ™”๋œ VUIs์˜ UX๋ฅผ ์กฐ์‚ฌํ•œ๋‹ค. ํ•˜๋‚˜์ด์ƒ์˜ VUIs๋ฅผ ์‚ฌ์šฉํ•œ ๊ฒฝํ—˜์ด ์žˆ๋Š” ์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์„ ๋Œ€์ƒ์œผ๋กœ ์„ค๋ฌธ์กฐ์‚ฌ๋ฅผ ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์ˆ˜์ง‘๋œ ๋ฐ์ดํ„ฐ๋Š” ํ†ต๊ณ„์ ์œผ๋กœ ๊ทธ๋ฆฌ๊ณ  ์ •์„ฑ์ ์œผ๋กœ ๋ถ„์„ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์ด ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์˜ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋“ค์€ ์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์˜ ์žฅ์• ์œ ํ˜•์— ๋”ฐ๋ผ VUIs์˜ ์ˆ˜์šฉ๋„(acceptance)์™€ ์ˆ˜์šฉ๋„ ์š”์ธ๋“ค ๊ฐ„ ๊ด€๊ณ„์— ์ฐจ์ด๊ฐ€ ์žˆ๋‹ค๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์„ ๋ณด์—ฌ์ค€๋‹ค. ๋˜ํ•œ, ์ด ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์˜ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋“ค์€ ์ˆ˜์šฉ๋„ ์š”์ธ๋“ค์ด VUIs์˜ UX ์ด์Šˆ๋“ค์„ ์ดํ•ดํ•˜๋Š”๋ฐ ์‚ฌ์šฉ๋  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋‹ค๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์„ ๋ณด์—ฌ์คŒ๊ณผ ํ•จ๊ป˜ ์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์„ ์œ„ํ•œ VUIs์˜ UX์™€ ๊ด€๋ จ๋œ ๋‹ค์–‘ํ•œ ์ธ์‚ฌ์ดํŠธ๋“ค(insights)์„ ์ œ๊ณตํ•ด์ค€๋‹ค. ์—ฐ๊ตฌ 2์—์„œ๋Š” ์˜๋ฏธ ์‹ ๊ฒฝ๋ง(semantic network) ๋ถ„์„์„ ํ†ตํ•ด ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๊ฐ€ ์ž‘์„ฑํ•œ ์˜จ๋ผ์ธ ๋ฆฌ๋ทฐ๋ฅผ ๊ธฐ๋ฐ˜์œผ๋กœ IPAs์˜ UX๋ฅผ ์กฐ์‚ฌํ•œ๋‹ค. ํ•ด๋‹น ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” ์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ IPAs์˜ UX๋ฅผ ์กฐ์‚ฌํ•˜๊ธฐ ์ „์— ๋น„์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ IPAs์˜ UX๋ฅผ ์กฐ์‚ฌํ•˜์—ฌ IPAs์˜ UX์™€ ๊ด€๋ จํ•˜์—ฌ ์ค‘์š”ํ•˜๊ฒŒ ๊ณ ๋ คํ•ด์•ผ ํ•  ์š”์ธ๋“ค์„ ์ œ์•ˆํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์ด๋ฅผ ์œ„ํ•ด ์‚ฌ๋ก€ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋กœ, ์ธํ„ฐ๋„ท์—์„œ ์Šค๋งˆํŠธ ์Šคํ”ผ์ปค์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์˜จ๋ผ์ธ ๋ฆฌ๋ทฐ๋“ค์„ ์ˆ˜์ง‘ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ๊ทธ ํ›„, ํ…์ŠคํŠธ ๋ฐ์ดํ„ฐ๋ฅผ ์ „์ฒ˜๋ฆฌ ๋ฐ ๊ตฌ์กฐํ™”์˜€๊ณ , ์ด ๊ณผ์ •์—์„œ ์œ ์‚ฌํ•œ ์˜๋ฏธ๋ฅผ ๊ฐ–๋Š” ๋‹จ์–ด๋“ค์ด ์žˆ์„ ๊ฒฝ์šฐ ํ•˜๋‚˜์˜ ๋Œ€ํ‘œ ํ‚ค์›Œ๋“œ๋กœ ๋ณ€ํ™˜ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์ด ๊ณผ์ •์„ ๊ฑฐ์นœ ํ›„, ํ‚ค์›Œ๋“œ๋“ค์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ๋นˆ๋„์ˆ˜๋ฅผ ๊ณ„์‚ฐํ•˜์—ฌ, ๋นˆ๋„์ˆ˜ ์ƒ์œ„ 50๊ฐœ์˜ ํ‚ค์›Œ๋“œ๋“ค์ด ํ•ต์‹ฌ ํ‚ค์›Œ๋“œ๋“ค๋กœ ๋ณด์˜€๊ธฐ์—, ๋นˆ๋„์ˆ˜ ์ƒ์œ„ 50๊ฐœ์˜ ํ‚ค์›Œ๋“œ๋“ค์„ ๋ถ„์„์— ์‚ฌ์šฉํ–ˆ๋‹ค. ์ด ํ‚ค์›Œ๋“œ๋“ค์„ ๋ฐ”ํƒ•์œผ๋กœ ๋„คํŠธ์›Œํฌ๋ฅผ ์‹œ๊ฐํ™” ํ•˜์˜€๊ณ  ์ค‘์‹ฌ์„ฑ(centrality)์„ ๊ณ„์‚ฐํ–ˆ๋‹ค. ์ด ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์˜ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋“ค์€ ๋น„๋ก IPAs์˜ ์„ฑ๋Šฅ์— ๋Œ€ํ•ด์„œ ์™„์ „ํžˆ ์‹ ๋ขฐํ•˜์ง€๋Š” ๋ชป ํ•˜๊ณ  ์žˆ๋”๋ผ๋„ ๋Œ€๋ถ€๋ถ„์˜ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์ด IPAs ์‚ฌ์šฉ์— ๋งŒ์กฑํ•˜๊ณ  ์žˆ์—ˆ๋‹ค๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์„ ๋ณด์—ฌ์ค€๋‹ค. ๋˜ํ•œ ์ด ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์˜ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋“ค์€ IPAs์˜ ์‹ฌ๋ฏธ์  ์ธก๋ฉด๋“ค์ด ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์˜ ์ฆ๊ฑฐ์›€๊ณผ ๋งŒ์กฑ์— ์ค‘์š”ํ•˜๋‹ค๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์„ ๋ณด์—ฌ์ค€๋‹ค. ์ด ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” IPAs์˜ UX๋ฅผ ์œ„ํ•ด ๊ณ ๋ คํ•ด์•ผ ํ•  ์—ด ํ•œ ๊ฐœ์˜ ์ค‘์š” ์š”์ธ๋“ค์„ ์ œ์•ˆํ•˜๊ณ , ๊ทธ ์ค‘์—์„œ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์„ ๋งŒ์กฑ์‹œํ‚ค๊ณ  IPAs์˜ ๋””์ž์ธ ์‹œ ๊ณ ๋ คํ•ด์•ผ ํ•  ํ•„์š”๊ฐ€ ์žˆ๋Š” ์—ด ๊ฐœ์˜ ์š”์ธ๋“ค์„ ์‹œ์‚ฌํ•ด์ค€๋‹ค. ์—ฐ๊ตฌ 3์—์„œ๋Š”, ์—ฐ๊ตฌ 1๊ณผ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ 2๋ฅผ ๋ฐ”ํƒ•์œผ๋กœ, ์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์„ ๋Œ€์ƒ์œผ๋กœ IPAs์˜ UX์— ๋Œ€ํ•ด ์กฐ์‚ฌํ•˜๊ณ  IPAs์˜ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ด ๊ทธ๋“ค์˜ ์‚ถ์˜ ์งˆ(quality of life)์— ์–ด๋– ํ•œ ์˜ํ–ฅ์„ ์ฃผ๋Š”์ง€์— ๋Œ€ํ•ด์„œ ์•Œ์•„๋ณด๊ณ ์ž ํ•œ๋‹ค. ์ด ๊ณผ์ •์—์„œ ๋น„์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค๊ณผ ๋น„๊ต ๋˜ํ•œ ์ด๋ฃจ์–ด์กŒ๋‹ค. ํ•˜๋‚˜์ด์ƒ์˜ IPAs๋ฅผ ์‚ฌ์šฉํ•˜๊ณ  ์žˆ๋Š” ์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค๊ณผ ๋น„์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์„ ๋Œ€์ƒ์œผ๋กœ ์„ค๋ฌธ์กฐ์‚ฌ์™€ ์„œ๋ฉด ์ธํ„ฐ๋ทฐ๋ฅผ ์ง„ํ–‰ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์ˆ˜์ง‘๋œ ๋ฐ์ดํ„ฐ๋Š” ํ†ต๊ณ„์ ์œผ๋กœ ๊ทธ๋ฆฌ๊ณ  ์ •์„ฑ์ ์œผ๋กœ ๋ถ„์„ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์ด ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์˜ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋“ค์€, ์žฅ์•  ์œ ๋ฌด์™€ ์ƒ๊ด€์—†์ด, ๋Œ€๋ถ€๋ถ„์˜ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์ด ์ฃผ์š” IPAs์˜ UX๋ฅผ ๊ณต์œ ํ•˜๊ณ  ์žˆ์œผ๋ฉฐ IPAs ์‚ฌ์šฉ์— ํ˜œํƒ์„ ๋ˆ„๋ฆฌ๊ณ  ์žˆ๋‹ค๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์„ ๋ณด์—ฌ์ค€๋‹ค. ๋˜ํ•œ, ์ด ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์˜ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋“ค์€ ์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์˜ ์ž…์žฅ์—์„œ IPAs์˜ UX์™€ ๊ด€๋ จ๋œ ๋‹ค์–‘ํ•œ ์ธ์‚ฌ์ดํŠธ๋“ค๊ณผ ํ•จ๊ป˜ ๋‘ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž ๊ทธ๋ฃน ๊ฐ„ ๋ช…ํ™•ํ•œ ์ฐจ์ด๊ฐ€ ์žˆ๋‹ค๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์„ ๋ณด์—ฌ์คŒ์œผ๋กœ์จ ์ด๋“ค์„ ๋Œ€์ƒ์œผ๋กœ ํ•œ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์—์„œ ์ •์„ฑ์  ๋ฐ์ดํ„ฐ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ๋ถ„์„์ด ํ•„์ˆ˜์ ์ด๋ผ๋Š” ์‚ฌ์‹ค์„ ๋ณด์—ฌ์ค€๋‹ค. ์ด ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š”, ์—ฐ๊ตฌ 2์—์„œ ๋…ผ์˜๋œ ์š”์ธ๋“ค์„ ๋ฐ”ํƒ•์œผ๋กœ, ์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค๊ณผ ๋น„์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์„ ์œ„ํ•œ IPAs์˜ UX์— ์žˆ์–ด ์ค‘์š” ์š”์ธ๋“ค์„ ์ œ์•ˆํ•œ๋‹ค. ๋˜ํ•œ ์ด ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” IPA์˜ UX์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ๋‹ค์–‘ํ•œ ๋””์ž์ธ ํ•จ์˜๋“ค(implications)์„ ๋…ผ์˜ํ•˜๊ณ , ์žฅ์• ๊ฐ€ ์žˆ๋Š” ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค๋ฟ๋งŒ ์•„๋‹ˆ๋ผ ๋ชจ๋“  ์ž ์žฌ์  ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์„ ๊ณ ๋ คํ•œ IPA์˜ ์ƒํ˜ธ ์ž‘์šฉ ์„ค๊ณ„์— ์ค‘์ ์„ ๋‘” ๊ตฌ์ฒด์ ์ธ ์„ธ ๊ฐœ์˜ ๋””์ž์ธ ํ•จ์˜๋“ค์„ ์ œ๊ณตํ•œ๋‹ค. ๊ฐ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” ๋””์ž์ธ ํ•จ์˜๋“ค์„ ์ œ๊ณตํ•œ๋‹ค. ์—ฐ๊ตฌ 1์—์„œ๋Š” ์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์„ ๋Œ€์ƒ์œผ๋กœ VUIs์˜ UX๋ฅผ ์œ„ํ•œ ๋””์ž์ธ ํ•จ์˜๋“ค์„ ๋…ผ์˜ํ•œ๋‹ค. ์—ฐ๊ตฌ 2์—์„œ๋Š” ๋น„์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์—๊ฒŒ ์ดˆ์ ์„ ๋‘๊ณ  IPAs์˜ UX๋ฅผ ์œ„ํ•œ ๋””์ž์ธ ํ•จ์˜๋“ค์„ ์ œ์‹œํ•œ๋‹ค. ์—ฐ๊ตฌ 3์—์„œ๋Š” ์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ๋“ค๋งŒ์ด ์•„๋‹Œ ๋ชจ๋“  ์ž ์žฌ์  ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์—๊ฒŒ ๋„์›€์ด ๋  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋Š” ๋‹ค์–‘ํ•œ ๋””์ž์ธ ํ•จ์˜๋“ค์„ ๋…ผ์˜ํ•˜๊ณ  IPA์˜ ์ƒํ˜ธ ์ž‘์šฉ ์„ค๊ณ„์— ์ค‘์ ์„ ๋‘” ๊ตฌ์ฒด์ ์ธ ์„ธ ๊ฐœ์˜ ๋””์ž์ธ ํ•จ์˜๋“ค์„ ์ œ์•ˆํ•œ๋‹ค. ์ด๋Ÿฌํ•œ ํ•จ์˜๋“ค์„ IPAs์˜ ๋””์ž์ธ์— ๋ฐ˜์˜ํ•˜๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์€ ์žฅ์• ์ธ ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค๋ฟ๋งŒ ์•„๋‹ˆ๋ผ ์ž ์žฌ์ ์ธ ๋ชจ๋“  ์‚ฌ์šฉ์ž๋“ค์—๊ฒŒ ๋„์›€์ด ๋  ๊ฒƒ์ด๋‹ค.ABSTRACT I CONTENTS V LIST OF TABLES VIII LIST OF FIGURES X CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1. Research Background 1 1.2. Research Objective 4 1.3. Outline of this Dissertation 7 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 10 2.1. People with Disabilities and Research Methods for Them 10 2.1.1. People with Disabilities 10 2.1.2. Research Methods for People with Disabilities 11 2.2. Conceptual Frameworks 13 2.2.1. User Experience of Voice User Interfaces 13 2.2.2. Design Approaches for Accessibility 18 2.3. Related Work 22 2.3.1. Previous Studies Related to Voice User Interfaces 22 2.3.2. Previous Studies Related to Intelligent Personal Assistants 25 CHAPTER 3 INVESTIGATION ON USER EXPERIENCE OF VOICE USER INTERFACES FOR USERS WITH DISABILITIES BY EXAMINING ACCEPTANCE 31 3.1. Introduction 31 3.2. Method 35 3.2.1. Participants 35 3.2.2. Procedure 35 3.2.3. Questionnaire 36 3.2.4. Analysis 38 3.2.4.1. Statistical Analysis 38 3.2.4.1. Qualitative Analysis 38 3.3. Results 38 3.3.1. Reliability Analysis and Validity Analysis 38 3.3.2. Descriptive Analysis and Independent Two-Sample T-Test 39 3.3.3. Multiple Regression Analysis 39 3.3.4. Analysis on Comments of the Participants 44 3.4. Discussion 45 3.4.1. User Experience of Voice User Interfaces for Users with Disabilities 45 3.4.2. Reasons of Users with Disabilities for Using Voice User Interfaces or not 48 3.4.3. Design Implications on Voice User Interfaces for Users with Disabilities 50 3.5. Conclusion 51 CHAPTER 4 INVESTIGATION ON USER EXPERIENCE OF INTELLIGENT PERSONAL ASSISTANTS FROM ONLINE REVIEWS BY IDENTIFYING IMPORTANT FACTORS 54 4.1. Introduction 54 4.2. Method 56 4.2.1. Data Collection 56 4.2.2. Preprocessing and Structuring Data 57 4.2.3. Analysis 57 4.3. Results 60 4.3.1. Analysis on Frequency of the Keywords and Categorizing the Keywords 61 4.3.2. Visualization of the Network 61 4.3.3. Analysis on Centrality of the Keywords 65 4.4. Discussion 65 4.4.1. User Experience of Intelligent Personal Assistants through Semantic Network Analysis from Online Reviews 65 4.4.2. Important Factors for User Experience of Intelligent Personal Assistants and Design Implications 70 4.5. Conclusion 74 CHAPTER 5 INVESTIGATION ON USER EXPERIENCE OF INTELLIGENT PERSONAL ASSISTANTS AND EFFECTS ON QUALITY OF LIFE FOR USERS WITH DISABILITIES BY COMPARING WITH USERS WITH NON-DISABILITIES 76 5.1. Introduction 76 5.2. Method 78 5.2.1. Participants 78 5.2.2. Procedure 79 5.2.3. Questionnaire 79 5.2.4. Written Interview 81 5.2.5. Analysis 84 5.2.5.1. Statistical Analysis 84 5.2.5.2. Qualitative Analysis 84 5.3. Results 85 5.3.1. Reliability Analysis and Validity Analysis 85 5.3.2. Descriptive Analysis and Mann-Whitney U-test 85 5.3.2.1. User Experience of Intelligent Personal Assistants 85 5.3.2.2. Effects of the Use of Intelligent Personal Assistants on Quality of Life 87 5.3.3. Analysis on the Written Interview 89 5.3.3.1. Analysis on Issues Related to User Experience from the Written Interview 89 5.3.3.2. Semantic Network Analysis on the Written Interview 91 5.4. Discussion 99 5.4.1. User Experience of Intelligent Personal Assistants 99 5.4.1.1. Discussion on the Statistical Analysis 99 5.4.1.2. Discussion on the Analysis on the Written Interview 106 5.4.2. Effects of the Use of Intelligent Personal Assistants on Quality of Life 110 5.4.2.1. Discussion on the Statistical Analysis 110 5.4.2.2. Discussion on the Analysis on the Written Interview 111 5.4.3. Design Implications for User Experience of Intelligent Personal Assistants for Users with Disabilities 112 5.5. Conclusion 115 CHAPTER 6 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION 118 6.1. Summary of this Research 118 6.2. Contributions of this Research 121 6.3. Limitations of this Research and Future Studies 124 BIBLIOGRAPHY 126 APPENDIX 143 ABSTRACT IN KOREAN (๊ตญ๋ฌธ ์ดˆ๋ก) 181Docto

    Analyzing Interaction for Automated Adaptation โ€“ First Steps in the IAAA Project

    Get PDF
    Because of an aging society and the relevance of computer-based systems in a variety of fields of our life, personalization of software systems is becoming more important by the day in order to prevent usage errors and create a good user experience. However, personalization typically is a time-consuming and costly process if it is done through manual configuration. Automated adaptation to specific usersโ€™ needs is, therefore, a useful way to reduce the efforts necessary. The IAAA project focuses on the analysis of user interaction capabilities and the implementation of automated adaptations based on them. However, the success of these endeavors is strongly reliant on a careful selection of interaction modalities as well as profound knowledge of the target groupโ€™s general interaction behavior. Therefore, as a first step in the project, an extensive task-based user observation with thorough involvement of the actual target group was conducted in order to determine input devices and modalities that would in a second step become subject of the first prototypic implementations. This paper discusses the general objectives of the IAAA project, describes the methodology and aims behind the user observation and presents its results

    Effects of Adjustments to Wheelchair Seat to Back Support Angle on Head, Neck, and Shoulder Postures

    Get PDF
    Background: People spend a long time in the sitting position may have poor alignment that leads to neck and back pain. A wheelchair represents mobility for people with cerebral palsy, who are unable to walk. They spend long periods of time sitting in their wheelchair. Opining the seat to back support angle of the wheelchair enable realignment body segments and improves posture. Objective: 1) assessed the validity/reliability of Coachโ€™s Eye (CE) smart device application, 2) examined the effect of seat to back support angle adjustments on head, neck, and shoulder posture in the sitting position, and 3) compared changes in cervical rotation at each seat to back support angle. Methods: Thirty-four subjects between the ages of 18 and 45 years abled subjects and subjects with cerebral palsy. All subjects sat in a research wheelchair with seat to back support angle at (90ยฐ, 100ยฐ, and 110ยฐ). Photographs were taken and analyzed by ImageJ and cacheโ€™s Eye (CE) software. Three body posture angles were used: sagittal head angle (SHA), cervical angle (CVA), and shoulder angle (SA). Results: There were highly significant differences on abled subjects for CVA and SA (p \u3c 0.001) among the three seat to back support angles. CE had high validity for all angles (r = 0.99, 0.98, 0.99 respectively, p \u3c 0.001). Inter-rater reliability for SHA, CVA, and SA among the three seat to back support angles was high (ICC ranged from 0.95 to 0.99). There were highly significant differences on abled subjects for CVA and SA (p \u3c 0.001). There were highly significant differences on subjects with cerebral palsy for SHA and CVA (p \u3c 0.001) among the three seat to back support angles. Conclusion: Head (CVA) and shoulder (SA) alignment was closest to neutral posture for abled subjects with seat to back support angles set at 110ยฐ and 90ยฐ, respectively. Head (SHA) and (CVA) alignment was closest to neutral posture for subjects with CP with seat to back support angles set at 110ยฐ

    How a Diverse Research Ecosystem Has Generated New Rehabilitation Technologies: Review of NIDILRRโ€™s Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers

    Get PDF
    Over 50 million United States citizens (1 in 6 people in the US) have a developmental, acquired, or degenerative disability. The average US citizen can expect to live 20% of his or her life with a disability. Rehabilitation technologies play a major role in improving the quality of life for people with a disability, yet widespread and highly challenging needs remain. Within the US, a major effort aimed at the creation and evaluation of rehabilitation technology has been the Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers (RERCs) sponsored by the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research. As envisioned at their conception by a panel of the National Academy of Science in 1970, these centers were intended to take a โ€œtotal approach to rehabilitationโ€, combining medicine, engineering, and related science, to improve the quality of life of individuals with a disability. Here, we review the scope, achievements, and ongoing projects of an unbiased sample of 19 currently active or recently terminated RERCs. Specifically, for each center, we briefly explain the needs it targets, summarize key historical advances, identify emerging innovations, and consider future directions. Our assessment from this review is that the RERC program indeed involves a multidisciplinary approach, with 36 professional fields involved, although 70% of research and development staff are in engineering fields, 23% in clinical fields, and only 7% in basic science fields; significantly, 11% of the professional staff have a disability related to their research. We observe that the RERC program has substantially diversified the scope of its work since the 1970โ€™s, addressing more types of disabilities using more technologies, and, in particular, often now focusing on information technologies. RERC work also now often views users as integrated into an interdependent society through technologies that both people with and without disabilities co-use (such as the internet, wireless communication, and architecture). In addition, RERC research has evolved to view users as able at improving outcomes through learning, exercise, and plasticity (rather than being static), which can be optimally timed. We provide examples of rehabilitation technology innovation produced by the RERCs that illustrate this increasingly diversifying scope and evolving perspective. We conclude by discussing growth opportunities and possible future directions of the RERC program
    • โ€ฆ
    corecore