Search for: All records

Few VR applications and games implement captioning of speech and audio cues, which either inhibits or prevents access of their application by deaf or hard of hearing (DHH) users, new language learners, and other caption users. Additionally, little to no guidelines exist on how to implement live captioning on VR headsets and how it may differ from traditional television captioning. To help fill the void of information behind user preferences of different VR captioning styles, we conducted a study with eight DHH participants to test three caption movement behaviors (head-locked, lag, and appear- locked) while watching live-captioned, single-speaker presentations in VR. Participants answered a series of Likert scale and open-ended questions about their experience. Participants’ preferences were split, but most participants reported feeling comfortable with using live captions in VR and enjoyed the experience. When participants ranked the caption behaviors, there was almost an equal divide between the three types tested. IPQ results indicated each behavior had similar immersion ratings, however participants found head-locked and lag captions more user-friendly than appear-locked captions. We suggest that participants may vary in caption preference depending on how they use captions, and that providing opportunities for caption customization is best. 

Deaf and hard of hearing (DHH) viewers watch multimedia with captions on devices with widely varying widths. We investigated the impact of caption width on viewers' preferences. Previous research has shown that presenting one word lines allows viewers to read much more quickly than traditional reading, while others have shown that the optimal width for captions is 6 words per line. Our study showed that DHH viewers had no preference difference between 6 and 12 word lines. Furthermore, they significantly preferred 6 and 12 word lines over single word lines due to the need to split attention between the captions and video. 

In this experience report, we describe the accessibility challenges that deaf and hard of hearing users face in teleconferences, based on both our first-hand participation in meetings, and as User Interface and Experience experts. Teleconferencing poses new accessibility challenges compared to face-to-face communication because of limited social, emotional, and haptic feedback. Above all, teleconferencing participants and organizers need to be flexible, because deaf or hard of hearing people have diverse communication preferences. We explain what recurring problems users experience, where current teleconferencing software falls short, and how to address these shortcomings. We offer specific recommendations for best practices and the experiential reasons behind them. 

People who are Deaf or Hard of Hearing (DHH) benefit from text captioning to understand audio, yet captions alone are often insufficient for the complex environment of a panel presentation, with rapid and unpredictable turn-taking among multiple speakers. It is challenging and tiring for DHH individuals to view captioned panel presentations, leading to feelings of misunderstanding and exclusion. In this work, we investigate the potential of Mixed Reality (MR) head-mounted displays for providing captioning with visual cues to indicate which person on the panel is speaking. For consistency in our experimental study, we simulate a panel presentation in virtual reality (VR) with various types of MR visual cues; in a study with 18 DHH participants, visual cues made it easier to identify speakers. 

To investigate preferences for mobile and wearable sound awareness systems, we conducted an online survey with 201 DHH participants. The survey explores how demographic factors affect perceptions of sound awareness technologies, gauges interest in specific sounds and sound characteristics, solicits reactions to three design scenarios (smartphone, smartwatch, head-mounted display) and two output modalities (visual, haptic), and probes issues related to social context of use. While most participants were highly interested in being aware of sounds, this interest was modulated by communication preference--that is, for sign or oral communication or both. Almost all participants wanted both visual and haptic feedback and 75% preferred to have that feedback on separate devices (e.g., haptic on smartwatch, visual on head-mounted display). Other findings related to sound type, full captions vs. keywords, sound filtering, notification styles, and social context provide direct guidance for the design of future mobile and wearable sound awareness systems.