The Virtual Thermostat

  PSYC 8040  Fall 2005

  Anne Adams ~ Britt Caldwell ~ Lisa Mauney ~

Jamie Weitz

2

Building an Assistive Technology—The Design

Process1. Identify target population

2. Needs analysis

3. Choose assistive technology to build

4. Task analysis/function allocation

5. Prototype

6. Evaluate prototypes

3

Target population

Visually impaired (blind and low vision) Why?

Inspired by guest speakers in class Faced with problems in everyday and work life

4

Perform a Needs Analysis

Interviewed 2 visually impaired women Household tasks

Preparing meals, finding lost objects, etc. Why?

Often defines level of independent living Constrain domain for scope of project

Goals Insight into common problems Which tasks/activities want help with

5

Needs Analysis – Results Daily Issues:

Any digital appliance Smooth surfaces Flat keys

AC and heating control Reading labels on frozen food, baking instructions Setting stove

Current solutions Braille labels and raised dot indicators Some over the counter (talking microwave),

but $$$$

7

Our First Idea Universal remote Control several appliances in house

Oven/stove Microwave Washer/dryer

Some issues Accidental activation (e.g., gas stove) Might lose remote General design issues

8

Our Second Idea

Thermostat Why?

Both participants mentioned issues with the AC and heat control

Have other people set thermostat Do not interact with the program function

Design alternatives Talking accessible thermostat Universal control (e.g., wall mount display) Software/web-based solution

9

Some existing thermostat AT…

10

… and a minor flaw in our action plan

11

Regroup & Revise

Focus on our software/web-based thermostat idea Pros:

Would not have to walk to thermostat Would not need to search for control (and cannot lose it) Could upload it to any computer Would make use of already existing computer AT (JAWS,

Freedom Box) Could be used by many people Supplementary to on-the-wall unit and remote control

Cons Need computer access Possible internet access Security issues

12

Not again!!!

13

14

15

Participatory Design

Second round of interviews Would visually impaired users want to use web-

based thermostat? Which functions would they like to have? How would they label the functions?

Interviewed 3 visually impaired women

16

Second Interview—Participant Responses

Single column One page Keep current labels (e.g., HEAT and COOL) General OFF button General Set Temperature button

17

The Prototype–Challenges/Considera

tions Different operating systems

Windows NT, XP, 2000 etc. Macintosh UNIX/Linux

Browser versions Internet Explorer Netscape Safari Firefox

Screen readers JAWS Freedom Box

How elaborate should the thermostat be?

18

Web Design Dreamweaver

Used for basic layout HTML

Used to add additional labeling JavaScript

Used to add feedback and update information MS Narrator

Used to help “visualize” how website will sound for target population

19

3 Prototypes http://www.cc.gatech.edu/~jrweitz/ac3.1.html

Combo boxes (drop-down menus) Program set using range of times (ex. from time x

to time y set temperature to …) http://www.cc.gatech.edu/~jrweitz/ac4.1.html

Radio buttons Program set using specific time (at time x set

temperature to …) http://www.cc.gatech.edu/~jrweitz/ac1.html

Links to change status Specific time (at time x set temperature to …)

20

Issues With Programming

Trouble getting input to display as feedback Trouble creating adequate functionality for

evaluation Unintended mislabeling of items Some errors caused by:

Unfamiliarity with (but need for) JavaScript Testing with MS Narrator vs. JAWS for speech

output

21

Evaluating the Solution

Tested prototypes with subject matter experts 5 engineering psychology students

Aged 25-30 4 males and 1 female

3 visually impaired participants Aged 48-54 3 females

22

Evaluation – Tasks and Measures

Tasks Get current temperature Change current temperature Set weekday or weekend schedule

Measures Task completion Errors Problems Comments

23

Results—Sighted Participants (First Website with Combo

Boxes) Mostly conceptual problems How system (heat/cool/off) and fan (on/off/auto) interact How to set program

Pros Clear Uncluttered Programming functionality

Cons Lack of feedback (current and future settings) Does current temperature or program take precedence? Scrolling Separate Saturday and Sunday schedules Put current and set temperature in closer proximity Confusion with Set Program and Run Program

24

Results—Sighted Participants (Second Website with Radio

Buttons) Mostly conceptual problems How system (heat/cool/off) and fan (on/off/auto) interact

Pros Can see options at once with radio buttons More compact Program easier

Cons Cannot set time ranges in program Physical separation of set temp and current temp Radio buttons are small targets Lack of feedback

25

Results—Sighted Participants (Third Website with Links)

Pros Links are easier targets

Cons No feedback Links suggest that it will go to another page Lack of separation between system

(HEAT,COOL,OFF) and Fan settings Hard to decipher (too many similar words) Make buttons instead

26

Website Preferences (Sighted Participants)

3 liked first website better Clearer differentiation of functions Organization of categories

2 liked second website better More visible Less scrolling Show all options at once

27

Results—Visually Impaired Participants (First Website with

Combo Boxes) Problems: amount of time

Fan mode placement confusing, caused scrolling Mislabeling “from”; “weekday” 26 out of 27 tasks (9 tasks x3 participants) were completed

successfully Pros

"Well done for accessibility!” Simple, intuitive despite labeling issues Loved combo boxes and ability to type in degrees

Cons Make sure labeling makes sense with screen readers

28

Results—Visually Impaired Participants (Second Website

with Radio Buttons) Problems: functionality

Forms mode not working with radio buttons Labeling: “1 out of 3”

Pros Simple Still liked the combo boxes Radio buttons listed after options

Cons “Doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.” Functionality problems but still think this version is harder to use Prefer consistency of all combo boxes

29

Results—Visually Impaired Participants (Third Website with

Links)

Pros Links don’t take you to another page Easier way to tab through options Easier for non-technological oriented

Cons Could deter people who wouldn’t want to leave

page Two still think combo boxes are overall easier

30

Website Preferences (Visually Impaired Participants)

2 strongly preferred first version Simple, combo boxes easy

1 preferred third version followed by first Dependent upon computer and JAWS familiarity?

3 liked the range “from” to “to” in the first version

Can you see yourself using the web to control your thermostat at home? “It would be cool!” Reliable and can use with any type of

thermostat “Absolutely! Send it to me!” Would also use it to control

other systems: security and lights

31

Recommendations/Obtain Feedback Where to put fan mode?

How to layout and label program Should “Set Program” be there? Move “Run Program” next to “Set Program”? Separate listings of days? Group all weekdays and all weekend days?

System model needs to match the users’ mental models

Add more feedback Show system status (e.g., HEAT is on) Put current temperature closer to “Set temperature to”

Rework the system model Use the capabilities of the software Give user only the options that make sense at a time

32

What We’ve Learned

Learning a programming language is hard! Web accessibility critical and very difficult! Need to test with screen readers throughout process People with disabilities do not want to spend any

more money on technology Individual differences in users’ preferences and

experiences Many different thermostats out there, making it

difficult to have one mental model of how one works