Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40028444›Full record

ArticleASSETS. Annual ACM Conference on Assistive Technologies2024

Understanding How Blind Users Handle Object Recognition Errors: Strategies and Challenges.

Jonggi Hong, Hernisa Kacorri

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in ASSETS. Annual ACM Conference on Assistive Technologies, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Say It My Way: Exploring Control in Conversational Visual Question Answering with Blind Users.Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. CHI Conference · 2026
    Article
  2. BeyondProceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. CHI Conference · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Jonggi HongDepartment of Computer Science, Stevens Institute of Technology, Hoboken, NJ, USA.
Hernisa KacorriCollege of Information, UMIACS, University of Maryland, College Park, College Park, MD, USA.

Funding

ACL HHS 90REGE0008ACL HHS 90REGE0024
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Object recognition technologies hold the potential to support blind and low-vision people in navigating the world around them. However, the gap between benchmark performances and practical usability remains a significant challenge. This paper presents a study aimed at understanding blind users' interaction with object recognition systems for identifying and avoiding errors. Leveraging a pre-existing object recognition system, URCam, fine-tuned for our experiment, we conducted a user study involving 12 blind and low-vision participants. Through in-depth interviews and hands-on error identification tasks, we gained insights into users' experiences, challenges, and strategies for identifying errors in camera-based assistive technologies and object recognition systems. During interviews, many participants preferred independent error review, while expressing apprehension toward misrecognitions. In the error identification task, participants varied viewpoints, backgrounds, and object sizes in their images to avoid and overcome errors. Even after repeating the task, participants identified only half of the errors, and the proportion of errors identified did not significantly differ from their first attempts. Based on these insights, we offer implications for designing accessible interfaces tailored to the needs of blind and low-vision users in identifying object recognition errors.

Indexed as

blindcamera-based assistive technologyobject recognition errorsvisual impairment

Identifiers

PMID40028444
PMCPMC11872236

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.