Use of eye-gaze technology feedback by assistive technology professionals: findings from a thematic analysis.

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q2 REHABILITATION
Tom Griffiths, Simon Judge, David Souto
{"title":"Use of eye-gaze technology feedback by assistive technology professionals: findings from a thematic analysis.","authors":"Tom Griffiths, Simon Judge, David Souto","doi":"10.1080/17483107.2024.2338125","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Purpose:</b> Eye-gaze technology offers professionals a range of feedback tools, but it is not well understood how these are used to support decision-making or how professionals understand their purpose and function. This paper explores how professionals use a variety of feedback tools and provides commentary on their current use and ideas for future tool development.<b>Methods and Materials:</b> The study adopted a focus group methodology with two groups of professional participants: those involved in the assessment and provision of eye-gaze technology (<i>n</i> = 6) and those who interact with individuals using eye-gaze technology on an ongoing basis (<i>n</i> = 5). Template analysis was used to provide qualitative insight into the research questions.<b>Results:</b> Professionals highlighted several issues with existing tools and gave suggestions on how these could be made better. It is generally felt that existing tools highlight the existence of problems but offer little in the way of solutions or suggestions. Some differences of opinion related to professional perspective were highlighted. Questions about automating certain processes were raised by both groups.<b>Conclusions:</b> Discussion highlighted the need for different levels of feedback for users and professionals. Professionals agreed that current tools are useful to identify problems but do not offer insight into potential solutions. Some tools are being used to draw inferences about vision and cognition which are not supported by existing literature. New tools may be needed to better meet the needs of professionals and an increased understanding of how existing tools function may support such development.</p>","PeriodicalId":47806,"journal":{"name":"Disability and Rehabilitation-Assistive Technology","volume":" ","pages":"2708-2725"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Disability and Rehabilitation-Assistive Technology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2024.2338125","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/4/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Eye-gaze technology offers professionals a range of feedback tools, but it is not well understood how these are used to support decision-making or how professionals understand their purpose and function. This paper explores how professionals use a variety of feedback tools and provides commentary on their current use and ideas for future tool development.Methods and Materials: The study adopted a focus group methodology with two groups of professional participants: those involved in the assessment and provision of eye-gaze technology (n = 6) and those who interact with individuals using eye-gaze technology on an ongoing basis (n = 5). Template analysis was used to provide qualitative insight into the research questions.Results: Professionals highlighted several issues with existing tools and gave suggestions on how these could be made better. It is generally felt that existing tools highlight the existence of problems but offer little in the way of solutions or suggestions. Some differences of opinion related to professional perspective were highlighted. Questions about automating certain processes were raised by both groups.Conclusions: Discussion highlighted the need for different levels of feedback for users and professionals. Professionals agreed that current tools are useful to identify problems but do not offer insight into potential solutions. Some tools are being used to draw inferences about vision and cognition which are not supported by existing literature. New tools may be needed to better meet the needs of professionals and an increased understanding of how existing tools function may support such development.

辅助技术专业人员使用眼动技术反馈的情况:专题分析结果。
目的:眼视技术为专业人士提供了一系列反馈工具,但人们对这些工具如何用于支持决策或专业人士如何理解其目的和功能并不十分了解。本文探讨了专业人士如何使用各种反馈工具,并对这些工具的当前使用情况进行了评述,同时提出了未来工具开发的想法:本研究采用焦点小组的方法,有两组专业人员参与:参与评估和提供眼动仪技术的人员(n = 6)和与使用眼动仪技术的个人持续互动的人员(n = 5)。采用模板分析法对研究问题进行定性分析:专业人士强调了现有工具存在的几个问题,并就如何改进这些工具提出了建议。人们普遍认为,现有工具突出了问题的存在,但却没有提供什么解决方案或建议。与专业视角有关的一些意见分歧也得到了强调。两个小组都提出了关于某些流程自动化的问题:讨论强调需要为用户和专业人员提供不同程度的反馈。专业人员一致认为,目前的工具有助于发现问题,但不能提供潜在解决方案的见解。有些工具被用于对视觉和认知进行推断,而这些推断并没有得到现有文献的支持。可能需要新的工具来更好地满足专业人员的需求,而加深对现有工具如何发挥作用的了解可能有助于此类工具的开发。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
13.60%
发文量
128
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信