Advertisement

Improving Deaf Driver Experience Through Innovative Vehicle Interactive Design

  • Jingpeng JiaEmail author
  • Xueyan Dong
  • Yanjuan Lu
  • Yingjie Qian
  • Dai Tang
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10920)

Abstract

This study aims to explore the application of storyboard and combination of storyboard and the technology of Internet of things (IoT) into the vehicle interactive design to improve deaf drivers’ experience. To achieve the aim, we introduced the storyboard approach into user need study and product prototype design, and practiced in the course of user experience at Beijing Union University. Our results show that the method has two benefits for students: 1. They can utilize storyboard to quickly understand the usage context of products without knowing the whole producing processes in real setting. 2. They can form future insights on the introduction of IoT into the vehicle interactive design, the deaf driving system, which has not been developed yet. This paper presents the approach in detail.

Keywords

Vehicle interaction system Interaction design Deaf driving User experience Internet of things 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank all participated students for their enthusiasm and hard work. We also thank Dr. Xueyan Dong for providing technology support on Internet of things. We would like to send our great thanks to professor Yanjuan Lu for contributions on the design method. We also want to thank the support from the company, Volkswagen in China for providing practicing opportunities.

Funding

The publication of this research project was supported by the BUU Scholar Scheme Funds for researchers at Beijing Union University (No. 12210611609-039).

References

  1. 1.
    Alexander, K., Fenker, M., Granath, J.Å., Haugen, T., Nissinen, K.: Usable workplaces: action research. In: Proceedings of CIB 2005, Combining Forces – Advancing Facilities Management & Construction through Innovation Series, pp. 389–399 (2005)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bitner, M.J., Booms, B.H., Tetreault, M.S.: The service encounter: diagnosing favorable and unfavorable incidents. J. Mark. 54(1), 71–84 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gummesson, E., Kingman-Brundage, J.: Service design and quality: applying service blueprinting and service mapping to railroad services. In: Kunst, P., Lemmink, J. (eds.) Quality Management in Services, pp. 101–114. Van Gorcum, Maastricht (1992)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nenonen, S., Nissinen, K.: Usability walkthrough usability walkthrough in workplaces – what, how, why and when. In: Proceedings of CIB 2005, Combining Forces – Advancing Facilities Management & Construction through Innovation Series, vol. IV, pp. 413–422 (2005)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jarvenpaa, S.L., Lang, K.R.: Managing the paradoxes of mobile technology. Inf. Syst. Manag. 22, 7–23 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jumisko, S.H., Ilvonen, V.P., Väänänen-Vainio-Mattila, K.A.: Effect of TV content in subjective assessment of video quality on mobile devices. In: Proceedings of SPIE — The International Society for Optical Engineering, pp. 243–254 (2005)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Venkatesh, V., Brown, S.A.: A longitudinal investigation of personal computers in homes: adoption determinants and emerging challenges. MIS Q. 25, 71–80 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Xu, X., Ma, W., See-To, E.W.K.: Will mobile video become the killer application for 3G? — an empirical model for media convergence. Inf. Syst. Front. 12, 311–322 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zhang, D., Adipat, B.: Challenges, methodologies, and issues in the usability testing of mobile applications. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 18(3), 293–308 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hoeben, A., Stappers, P.J.: Taking clues from the world outside: navigating interactive panoramas. J. Pers. Ubiquit. Comput. 10(2–3), 122–127 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nardi, B.A., Whittaker, S., Bradner, E.: Interaction and outeraction: instant messaging in action. In: Proceedings of the 2000 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, pp. 79–88. ACM Press, New York (2000)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cleaveland, M.C., Larkins, E.R.: Web-based practice and feedback improve tax students’ written communication skills. J. Account. Educ. 22, 211–228 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mohrweis, L.C.: The impact of writing assignments on accounting students’ writing skills. J. Account. Educ. 9, 309–325 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wixon, D.R.: Measuring fun, trust, confidence, and other ethereal constructs: it isn’t that hard. Interactions 18(6), 74–77 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Thüring, M., Mahlke, S.: Usability, aesthetics and emotions in human–technology interaction. Int. J. Psychol. 42(4), 253–264 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Archer, B.: The nature of research. J. Codesign 2, 6–13 (1995)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Avison, D.E., Lau, F., Myers, M.D., Nielsen, P.A.: Action research. Commun. ACM 42(1), 94–97 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jingpeng Jia
    • 1
    Email author
  • Xueyan Dong
    • 1
  • Yanjuan Lu
    • 1
  • Yingjie Qian
    • 1
  • Dai Tang
    • 1
  1. 1.Beijing Union UniversityBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations