Lloyd May
ABSTRACT
This case study details the process of generating recommendations for the implementation of specific haptic technologies in an upcoming exhibition of sound and video art in order to improve the museum experience for Deaf and Hard of Hearing patrons. Various haptic technologies and intensity settings were evaluated by D/deaf and Hard of Hearing participants through a combination of structured user experience surveying and a focus group. Insights gained from this mixed-methods approach were then used to generate recommendations for specific vibro-tactile technologies for each artwork in the exhibition. Additionally, general design insights into designing more accessible sound-art experiences, such as the need for tailored haptic signal design instead of using native audio signals, were also provided.
Footnotes
Supplemental Material
- Helena Garcia Carrizosa, Kieron Sheehy, Jonathan Rix, Jane Seale, and Simon Hayhoe. 2020. Designing technologies for museums: accessibility and participation issues. Journal of Enabling Technologies 14, 1 (2020), 31–39.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Gill Crawshaw. 2021. Activating captions – an absorbing demonstration of caption culture from Argos Arts. https://disabilityarts.online/magazine/opinion/activating-captions-an-absorbing-demonstration-of-caption-culture-from-argos-arts/Google Scholar
- Summer Crider. 2009. Re-Defining Music Through Deaf Lens. Master’s thesis. Gallaudet University, Washington, DC (2009).Google Scholar
- Ziff Davis. 1997. Behind the Screens: Shake it Up, Baby. Electronic Gaming Monthly. No. 95.(1997), 74.Google Scholar
- Sara Hendren. 2020. What Can a Body Do?: How We Meet the Built World. Penguin.Google Scholar
- Wendy Jacobs. 2009. Waves and Signs (The Floor). Center for Advanced Visual Studies, MIT. http://wendyjacob.net/?page_id=133Google Scholar
- Kim Kullman. 2019. Politics of dissensus in geographies of architecture: Testing equality at Ed Roberts Campus, Berkeley. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 44, 2(2019), 284–298.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Harlan Lane. 1995. Constructions of deafness. Disability & Society 10, 2 (1995), 171–190.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Nina Levent and Christine Reich. 2013. Museum accessibility: Combining audience research and staff training. Journal of Museum Education 38, 2 (2013), 218–226.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Emily McDermott and Wendy Jacobs. 2019. Rethinking Sensory Dimensions: A Conversation with Wendy Jacob. https://www.artpapers.org/wendyjacob/Google Scholar
- Susanna Meyer, Linda Larrivee, Ann Veneziano-Korzec, and Katrina Stacy. 2017. Improving art museum accessibility for adults with acquired hearing loss. American Journal of Audiology 26, 1 (2017), 10–17.Google ScholarCross Ref
Index Terms
- Designing Access in Sound Art Exhibitions: Centering Deaf Experiences in Musical Thinking
Recommendations
How people who are deaf, Deaf, and hard of hearing use technology in creative sound activities
ASSETS '22: Proceedings of the 24th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and AccessibilityCreative sound activities, such as music playing and audio engineering, are said to have been democratized with the development of technology. Yet, the use of technology in creative sound activities by people who are deaf, Deaf, and hard of hearing (DHH)...
Sound art: Origins, development and ambiguities
This article provides an overview of sound art, encompassing its history and artistic development, and the complexities of the term’s use as a categorisation. It starts with various definitions employed and the ways that recent museum exhibitions have ...
Designing AR enhanced art exhibitions: a methodology and a case study
CHItaly '19: Proceedings of the 13th Biannual Conference of the Italian SIGCHI Chapter: Designing the next interactionThis paper describes a methodology for the creation of augmented reality experiences for artistic exhibitions, targeted at offering a smooth authoring path to designers with limited computer science skills. The work describes how to design a smooth and ...
Comments