Sue Valerie Gray Cobb, P.J. Standen, David Brown and Pedro Gamito
Katerina Pieri and Sue Valerie Gray Cobb
People with severe or profound hearing loss face daily communication problems mainly due to the language barrier between themselves and the hearing community. Their hearing…
Abstract
Purpose
People with severe or profound hearing loss face daily communication problems mainly due to the language barrier between themselves and the hearing community. Their hearing deficiency, as well as their use of sign language, often makes it difficult for them to use and understand spoken language. Cyprus is amongst the top 5 European countries with a relatively high proportion of registered deaf people (0.12 per cent of the population: GUL, 2010). However, lack of technological and financial support to the Deaf Community of Cyprus leaves the Cypriot deaf people unsupported and marginalised. The paper aims to discuss this issue.
Design/methodology/approach
This study implemented user-centred design methods to explore the communication needs and requirements of Cypriot deaf people and develop a functional prototype of a mobile app to help them to communicate more effectively with hearing people. A total of 76 deaf adults were involved in various stages of the research. This paper presents the participatory design activities (N=8) and results of usability testing (N=8).
Findings
The study found that users were completely satisfied with the mobile app and, in particular, they liked the use of Cypriot Sign Language (CSL) videos of a real person interpreting hearing people’s speech in real time and the custom onscreen keyboard to allow faster selection of text input.
Originality/value
Despite advances in communication aid technologies, there is currently no technology available that supports CSL or real-time speech to sign language conversion for the deaf people of Cyprus.
Details
Keywords
Maria Jose Galvez Trigo, Penelope Jane Standen and Sue Valerie Gray Cobb
The purpose of this paper is to identify the main reasons for low uptake of robots in special education (SE), obtained from an analysis of previous studies that used robots in the…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to identify the main reasons for low uptake of robots in special education (SE), obtained from an analysis of previous studies that used robots in the area, and from interviewing SE teachers about the topic.
Design/methodology/approach
An analysis of 18 studies that used robots in SE was performed, and the conclusions were complemented and compared with the feedback from interviewing 13 SE teachers from Spain and the UK about the reasons they believed caused the low uptake of robots in SE classrooms.
Findings
Five main reasons why SE schools do not normally use robots in their classrooms were identified: the inability to acquire the system due to its price or availability; its difficulty of use; the low range of activities offered; the limited ways of interaction offered; and the inability to use different robots with the same software.
Originality/value
Previous studies focussed on exploring the advantages of using robots to help children with autism spectrum conditions and learning disabilities. This study takes a step further and looks into the reasons why, despite the benefits shown, robots are rarely used in real-life settings after the relevant study ends. The authors also present a potential solution to the issues found: involving end users in the design and development of new systems using a user-centred design approach for all the components, including methods of interaction, learning activities and the most suitable type of robots.
Details
Keywords
Investigates the differences in protocols between arbitral tribunals and courts, with particular emphasis on US, Greek and English law. Gives examples of each country and its way…
Abstract
Investigates the differences in protocols between arbitral tribunals and courts, with particular emphasis on US, Greek and English law. Gives examples of each country and its way of using the law in specific circumstances, and shows the variations therein. Sums up that arbitration is much the better way to gok as it avoids delays and expenses, plus the vexation/frustration of normal litigation. Concludes that the US and Greek constitutions and common law tradition in England appear to allow involved parties to choose their own judge, who can thus be an arbitrator. Discusses e‐commerce and speculates on this for the future.