skip to main content
10.1145/3373625.3416996acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesassetsConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Open Access
Best Student Paper

Living Disability Theory: Reflections on Access, Research, and Design

Authors Info & Claims
Published:29 October 2020Publication History

ABSTRACT

Accessibility research and disability studies are intertwined fields focused on, respectively, building a world more inclusive of people with disability and understanding and elevating the lived experiences of disabled people. Accessibility research tends to focus on creating technology related to impairment, while disability studies focuses on understanding disability and advocating against ableist systems. Our paper presents a reflexive analysis of the experiences of three accessibility researchers and one disability studies scholar. We focus on moments when our disability was misunderstood and causes such as expecting clearly defined impairments. We derive three themes: ableism in research, oversimplification of disability, and human relationships around disability. From these themes, we suggest paths toward more strongly integrating disability studies perspectives and disabled people into accessibility research.

References

  1. 2018. 2018 Workshop on AI Fairness for People with Disabilities - IBM. https://researcher.watson.ibm.com/researcher/view_group.php?id=9642 Library Catalog: researcher.watson.ibm.com.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. 2019. WORKSHOP - AI FAIRNESS WORKSHOP | ACM ASSETS 2019 - PITTSBURGH, PA, USA (October 28th to 30th, 2019). https://assets19.sigaccess.org/ai_fairness_workshop.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. 2020. Teaching and Learning Critical Disability Studies Facebook Group. https://www.facebook.com/groups/499798657103618/ Library Catalog: www.facebook.com Publisher: Facebook Groups.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Mariam Asad. 2019. Prefigurative Design as a Method for Research Justice. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 3, CSCW (Nov. 2019), 200:1–200:18. https://doi.org/10.1145/3359302Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Sairam Balani and Munmun De Choudhury. 2015. Detecting and Characterizing Mental Health Related Self-Disclosure in Social Media. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems(CHI EA ’15). Association for Computing Machinery, Seoul, Republic of Korea, 1373–1378. https://doi.org/10.1145/2702613.2732733Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Andrea Barbarin, Tiffany C. Veinot, and Predrag Klasnja. 2015. Taking our Time: Chronic Illness and Time-Based Objects in Families. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing(CSCW ’15). Association for Computing Machinery, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 288–301. https://doi.org/10.1145/2675133.2675200Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Shaowen Bardzell. 2010. Feminist HCI: Taking Stock and Outlining an Agenda for Design. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(CHI ’10). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1301–1310. https://doi.org/10.1145/1753326.1753521Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Cynthia L. Bennett, Erin Brady, and Stacy M. Branham. 2018. Interdependence as a Frame for Assistive Technology Research and Design. In Proceedings of the 20th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility(ASSETS ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, Galway, Ireland, 161–173. https://doi.org/10.1145/3234695.3236348Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Cynthia L. Bennett, Keting Cen, Katherine M. Steele, and Daniela K. Rosner. 2016. An Intimate Laboratory? Prostheses as a Tool for Experimenting with Identity and Normalcy. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(CHI ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, San Jose, California, USA, 1745–1756. https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858564Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Cynthia L. Bennett, Burren Peil, and Daniela K. Rosner. 2019. Biographical Prototypes: Reimagining Recognition and Disability in Design. In Proceedings of the 2019 on Designing Interactive Systems Conference(DIS ’19). Association for Computing Machinery, San Diego, CA, USA, 35–47. https://doi.org/10.1145/3322276.3322376Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Cynthia L. Bennett, Daniela K. Rosner, and Alex S. Taylor. 2020. The Care Work of Access. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(CHI ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, Honolulu, HI, USA, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376568Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Katya Borgos-Rodriguez, Kathryn E. Ringland, and Anne Marie Piper. 2019. MyAutsomeFamilyLife: Analyzing Parents of Children with Developmental Disabilities on YouTube. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 3, CSCW (Nov. 2019), 94:1–94:26. https://doi.org/10.1145/3359196Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Danielle Bragg, Oscar Koller, Mary Bellard, Larwan Berke, Patrick Boudreault, Annelies Braffort, Naomi Caselli, Matt Huenerfauth, Hernisa Kacorri, Tessa Verhoef, Christian Vogler, and Meredith Ringel Morris. 2019. Sign Language Recognition, Generation, and Translation: An Interdisciplinary Perspective. In The 21st International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility(ASSETS ’19). Association for Computing Machinery, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 16–31. https://doi.org/10.1145/3308561.3353774Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Robin Brewer and Anne Marie Piper. 2016. ”Tell It Like It Really Is”: A Case of Online Content Creation and Sharing Among Older Adult Bloggers. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(CHI ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, San Jose, California, USA, 5529–5542. https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858379Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. F. Campbell. 2009. Contours of Ableism: The Production of Disability and Abledness. Springer. Google-Books-ID: sJ6HDAAAQBAJ.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Maitraye Das, Katya Borgos-Rodriguez, and Anne Marie Piper. 2020. Weaving by Touch: A Case Analysis of Accessible Making. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(CHI ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, Honolulu, HI, USA, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376477Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Jay Timothy Dolmage. 2014. Disability Rhetoric. Syracuse University Press. Google-Books-ID: FIGiAgAAQBAJ.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Lynn Dombrowski, Ellie Harmon, and Sarah Fox. 2016. Social Justice-Oriented Interaction Design: Outlining Key Design Strategies and Commitments. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems(DIS ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, Brisbane, QLD, Australia, 656–671. https://doi.org/10.1145/2901790.2901861Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Virginia Elderkin-Thompson and Howard Waitzkin. 1999. Differences in clinical communication by gender. Journal of General Internal Medicine 14, 2 (Feb. 1999), 112–121. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1497.1999.00296.xGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Nirmala Erevelles and Andrea Minear. 2010. Unspeakable Offenses: Untangling Race and Disability in Discourses of Intersectionality. Journal of Literary & Cultural Disability Studies 4, 2 (Jan. 2010), 127–145. https://doi.org/10.3828/jlcds.2010.11 Publisher: Liverpool University Press.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Jordan Eschler, Arpita Bhattacharya, and Wanda Pratt. 2018. Designing a Reclamation of Body and Health: Cancer Survivor Tattoos as Coping Ritual. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(CHI ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, Montreal QC, Canada, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3174084Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Heather A. Faucett, Kate E. Ringland, Amanda L. L. Cullen, and Gillian R. Hayes. 2017. (In)Visibility in Disability and Assistive Technology. ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing 10, 4 (Oct. 2017), 14:1–14:17. https://doi.org/10.1145/3132040Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Jessica L. Feuston and Anne Marie Piper. 2018. Beyond the Coded Gaze: Analyzing Expression of Mental Health and Illness on Instagram. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 2, CSCW (Nov. 2018), 51:1–51:21. https://doi.org/10.1145/3274320Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Geraldine Fitzpatrick. 2019. Jen Mankoff on managing an academic career with a disability & finding good ways forward. http://www.changingacademiclife.com/blog/2019/4/23/jen-mankoff Library Catalog: www.changingacademiclife.com.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Christopher Frauenberger. 2015. Disability and Technology: A Critical Realist Perspective. In Proceedings of the 17th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers & Accessibility(ASSETS ’15). Association for Computing Machinery, Lisbon, Portugal, 89–96. https://doi.org/10.1145/2700648.2809851Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Rosemarie Garland-Thomson. 2002. Integrating Disability, Transforming Feminist Theory. NWSA Journal 14, 3 (2002), 1–32. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4316922 Publisher: The Johns Hopkins University Press.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Rosemarie Garland‐Thomson. 2005. Feminist Disability Studies. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 30, 2 (Jan. 2005), 1557–1587. https://doi.org/10.1086/423352 Publisher: The University of Chicago Press.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Faye Ginsburg and Rayna Rapp. 2013. Disability Worlds. Annual Review of Anthropology 42, 1 (2013), 53–68. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-anthro-092412-155502 _eprint: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-anthro-092412-155502.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Raymond Glazier. 2001. The ”Re-Invention” of Personal Assistance Services. Disability Studies Quarterly 21, 2 (April 2001). https://doi.org/10.18061/dsq.v21i2.285 Number: 2.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Aimi Hamraie. 2013. Designing Collective Access: A Feminist Disability Theory of Universal Design. Disability Studies Quarterly 33, 4 (Sept. 2013). https://doi.org/10.18061/dsq.v33i4.3871 Number: 4.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. Donna Haraway. 1988. Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective. Feminist Studies 14, 3 (1988), 575–599. https://doi.org/10.2307/3178066 Publisher: Feminist Studies, Inc.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. Kelly M. Hoffman, Sophie Trawalter, Jordan R. Axt, and M. Norman Oliver. 2016. Racial bias in pain assessment and treatment recommendations, and false beliefs about biological differences between blacks and whites. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 113, 16 (April 2016), 4296–4301. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1516047113 Publisher: National Academy of Sciences Section: Social Sciences.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Diane E. Hoffmann and Anita J. Tarzian. 2001. The Girl Who Cried Pain: A Bias Against Women in the Treatment of Pain. SSRN Scholarly Paper ID 383803. Social Science Research Network, Rochester, NY. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.383803Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. Megan Hofmann, Kristin Williams, Toni Kaplan, Stephanie Valencia, Gabriella Hann, Scott E. Hudson, Jennifer Mankoff, and Patrick Carrington. 2019. ”Occupational Therapy is Making”: Clinical Rapid Prototyping and Digital Fabrication. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(CHI ’19). Association for Computing Machinery, Glasgow, Scotland Uk, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300544Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Jina Huh and Mark S. Ackerman. 2012. Collaborative help in chronic disease management: supporting individualized problems. In Proceedings of the ACM 2012 conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work(CSCW ’12). Association for Computing Machinery, Seattle, Washington, USA, 853–862. https://doi.org/10.1145/2145204.2145331Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Jina Huh, Leslie S. Liu, Tina Neogi, Kori Inkpen, and Wanda Pratt. 2014. Health Vlogs as Social Support for Chronic Illness Management. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 21, 4 (Aug. 2014), 23:1–23:31. https://doi.org/10.1145/2630067Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Sins Invalid. 2017. Skin, Tooth, and Bone - The Basis of Movement is Our People: A Disability Justice Primer. Reproductive Health Matters 25, 50 (2017), 149–150. https://doi.org/10.1080/09688080.2017.1335999Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. Dhruv Jain, Audrey Desjardins, Leah Findlater, and Jon E. Froehlich. 2019. Autoethnography of a Hard of Hearing Traveler. In The 21st International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility(ASSETS ’19). Association for Computing Machinery, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 236–248. https://doi.org/10.1145/3308561.3353800Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Alison Kafer. 2013. Feminist, Queer, Crip. Indiana University Press. Google-Books-ID: F4X6yaiCNOcC.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Devva Kasnitz. 2020. The Politics of Disability Performativity: An Autoethnography. Current Anthropology 61, S21 (Feb. 2020), S16–S25. https://doi.org/10.1086/705782 Publisher: The University of Chicago Press.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  41. Amanda Lazar, Caroline Edasis, and Anne Marie Piper. 2017. A Critical Lens on Dementia and Design in HCI. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(CHI ’17). Association for Computing Machinery, Denver, Colorado, USA, 2175–2188. https://doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3025522Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Talia A. Lewis. 2020. Ableism 2020: An Updated Definition. https://www.talilalewis.com/blog/ableism-2020-an-updated-definitionGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Simi Linton. 1998. Claiming Disability: Knowledge and Identity. NYU Press. Google-Books-ID: IxUVCgAAQBAJ.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Leslie S. Liu, Kori M. Inkpen, and Wanda Pratt. 2015. ”I’m Not Like My Friends”: Understanding How Children with a Chronic Illness Use Technology to Maintain Normalcy. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing(CSCW ’15). Association for Computing Machinery, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 1527–1539. https://doi.org/10.1145/2675133.2675201Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. Jennifer Mankoff, Gillian R. Hayes, and Devva Kasnitz. 2010. Disability studies as a source of critical inquiry for the field of assistive technology. In Proceedings of the 12th international ACM SIGACCESS conference on Computers and accessibility(ASSETS ’10). Association for Computing Machinery, Orlando, Florida, USA, 3–10. https://doi.org/10.1145/1878803.1878807Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. Jennifer Mankoff, Kateryna Kuksenok, Sara Kiesler, Jennifer A. Rode, and Kelly Waldman. 2011. Competing online viewpoints and models of chronic illness. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(CHI ’11). Association for Computing Machinery, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 589–598. https://doi.org/10.1145/1978942.1979027Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. Robert McRuer. 2006. Crip Theory: Cultural Signs of Queerness and Disability. NYU Press. Google-Books-ID: V3GPb2obU0gC.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. Helen Meekosha and Russell Shuttleworth. 2009. What’s so ‘critical’ about critical disability studies?Australian Journal of Human Rights 15, 1 (Nov. 2009), 47–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/1323238X.2009.11910861 Publisher: Routledge _eprint: https://doi.org/10.1080/1323238X.2009.11910861.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  49. Mia Mingus. [n.d.]. Leaving Evidence. https://leavingevidence.wordpress.com/ Library Catalog: leavingevidence.wordpress.com.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. Karen Nakamura. 2019. My Algorithms Have Determined You’re Not Human: AI-ML, Reverse Turing-Tests, and the Disability Experience. In The 21st International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility(ASSETS ’19). Association for Computing Machinery, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 1–2. https://doi.org/10.1145/3308561.3353812Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  51. Joe Norris, Richard D. Sawyer, and Darren Lund. 2012. Duoethnography: Dialogic Methods for Social, Health, and Educational Research. Left Coast Press. Google-Books-ID: fNswUuzGCdYC.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. Ihudiya Finda Ogbonnaya-Ogburu, Angela D.R. Smith, Alexandra To, and Kentaro Toyama. 2020. Critical Race Theory for HCI. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(CHI ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, Honolulu, HI, USA, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376392Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  53. Leah Lakshmi Piepzna-Samarasinha. 2018. Care work: Dreaming disability justice. arsenal pulp press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  54. Ruth Pinder. 1996. Sick-but-fit or fit-but-sick? Ambiguity and identity at the workplace. Exploring the divide(1996), 135–156. Publisher: The Disability Press Leeds.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  55. Halley Profita, Reem Albaghli, Leah Findlater, Paul Jaeger, and Shaun K. Kane. 2016. The AT Effect: How Disability Affects the Perceived Social Acceptability of Head-Mounted Display Use. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(CHI ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, San Jose, California, USA, 4884–4895. https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858130Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  56. Halley P. Profita, Abigale Stangl, Laura Matuszewska, Sigrunn Sky, and Shaun K. Kane. 2016. Nothing to Hide: Aesthetic Customization of Hearing Aids and Cochlear Implants in an Online Community. In Proceedings of the 18th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility(ASSETS ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, Reno, Nevada, USA, 219–227. https://doi.org/10.1145/2982142.2982159Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  57. Yolanda A. Rankin and Jakita O. Thomas. 2019. Straighten up and fly right: rethinking intersectionality in HCI research. Interactions 26, 6 (Oct. 2019), 64–68. https://doi.org/10.1145/3363033Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  58. Gisela Reyes-Cruz, Joel E. Fischer, and Stuart Reeves. 2020. Reframing Disability as Competency: Unpacking Everyday Technology Practices of People with Visual Impairments. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(CHI ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, Honolulu, HI, USA, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376767Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  59. Kathryn E. Ringland, Jennifer Nicholas, Rachel Kornfield, Emily G. Lattie, David C. Mohr, and Madhu Reddy. 2019. Understanding Mental Ill-health as Psychosocial Disability: Implications for Assistive Technology. In The 21st International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility(ASSETS ’19). Association for Computing Machinery, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 156–170. https://doi.org/10.1145/3308561.3353785Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  60. Kathryn E. Ringland, Christine T. Wolf, LouAnne E. Boyd, Mark S. Baldwin, and Gillian R. Hayes. 2016. Would You Be Mine: Appropriating Minecraft as an Assistive Technology for Youth with Autism. In Proceedings of the 18th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility(ASSETS ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, Reno, Nevada, USA, 33–41. https://doi.org/10.1145/2982142.2982172Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  61. Larry Roberts. 2011. Computer scientist researched her own condition, Lyme disease. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (April 2011). https://www.post-gazette.com/news/health/2011/04/11/Computer-scientist-researched-her-own-condition-Lyme-disease/stories/201104110223 Library Catalog: www.post-gazette.com.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  62. Daniela K. Rosner, Samantha Shorey, Brock R. Craft, and Helen Remick. 2018. Making Core Memory: Design Inquiry into Gendered Legacies of Engineering and Craftwork. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(CHI ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, Montreal QC, Canada, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3174105Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  63. Ellen Samuels. 2014. Fantasies of Identification: Disability, Gender, Race. NYU Press. Google-Books-ID: Sn8TCgAAQBAJ.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  64. Ellen Jean Samuels. 2003. My Body, My Closet: Invisible Disability and the Limits of Coming-Out Discourse. GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies 9, 1 (April 2003), 233–255. https://muse.jhu.edu/article/40803 Publisher: Duke University Press.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  65. Carrie Sandahl. 2003. Queering the Crip or Cripping the Queer?: Intersections of Queer and Crip Identities in Solo Autobiographical Performance. GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies 9, 1 (April 2003), 25–56. https://muse.jhu.edu/article/40804 Publisher: Duke University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  66. Morgan Klaus Scheuerman. [n.d.]. HCI Inclusive Gender Guidelines | morgan-klaus. https://www.morgan-klaus.com/sigchi-gender-guidelinesGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  67. Ari Schlesinger, W. Keith Edwards, and Rebecca E. Grinter. 2017. Intersectional HCI: Engaging Identity Through Gender, Race, and Class. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(CHI ’17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 5412–5427. https://doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3025766Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  68. SDS. [n.d.]. Society for Disability Studies. https://disstudies.org/ Library Catalog: disstudies.org.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  69. Kristen Shinohara and Josh Tenenberg. 2007. Observing Sara: a case study of a blind person’s interactions with technology. In Proceedings of the 9th international ACM SIGACCESS conference on Computers and accessibility(Assets ’07). Association for Computing Machinery, Tempe, Arizona, USA, 171–178. https://doi.org/10.1145/1296843.1296873Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  70. Kristen Shinohara and Jacob O. Wobbrock. 2011. In the shadow of misperception: assistive technology use and social interactions. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(CHI ’11). Association for Computing Machinery, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 705–714. https://doi.org/10.1145/1978942.1979044Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  71. Kristen Shinohara and Jacob O. Wobbrock. 2016. Self-Conscious or Self-Confident? A Diary Study Conceptualizing the Social Accessibility of Assistive Technology. ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing 8, 2 (Jan. 2016), 5:1–5:31. https://doi.org/10.1145/2827857Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  72. Emily Sohn. 2018. When sickness interrupts science. Nature (Jan. 2018). https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-00112-7Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  73. Daniel G. Solórzano and Tara J. Yosso. 2002. Critical Race Methodology: Counter-Storytelling as an Analytical Framework for Education Research. Qualitative Inquiry 8, 1 (Feb. 2002), 23–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/107780040200800103 Publisher: SAGE Publications Inc.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  74. Abigale Stangl, Ann Cunningham, Lou Ann Blake, and Tom Yeh. 2019. Defining Problems of Practices to Advance Inclusive Tactile Media Consumption and Production. In The 21st International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility(ASSETS ’19). Association for Computing Machinery, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 329–341. https://doi.org/10.1145/3308561.3353778Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  75. Kevin M. Storer and Stacy M. Branham. 2019. “That’s the Way Sighted People Do It”: What Blind Parents Can Teach Technology Designers About Co-Reading with Children. In Proceedings of the 2019 on Designing Interactive Systems Conference(DIS ’19). Association for Computing Machinery, San Diego, CA, USA, 385–398. https://doi.org/10.1145/3322276.3322374Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  76. Richard L Street. 2002. Gender differences in health care provider–patient communication: are they due to style, stereotypes, or accommodation?Patient Education and Counseling 48, 3 (Dec. 2002), 201–206. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0738-3991(02)00171-4Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  77. Richard L. Street. 2013. How clinician–patient communication contributes to health improvement: Modeling pathways from talk to outcome. Patient Education and Counseling 92, 3 (Sept. 2013), 286–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2013.05.004Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  78. Lucy Suchman. 2009. Agencies in Technology Design: Feminist Reconfigurations. http://elib.suub.uni-bremen.de/ip/docs/00010581.pdf (Jan. 2009).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  79. Anja Thieme, Cynthia L. Bennett, Cecily Morrison, Edward Cutrell, and Alex S. Taylor. 2018. “I can do everything but see!” – How People with Vision Impairments Negotiate their Abilities in Social Contexts. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(CHI ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, Montreal QC, Canada, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3173777Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  80. Anja Thieme, Jayne Wallace, Thomas D. Meyer, and Patrick Olivier. 2015. Designing for mental wellbeing: towards a more holistic approach in the treatment and prevention of mental illness. In Proceedings of the 2015 British HCI Conference(British HCI ’15). Association for Computing Machinery, Lincoln, Lincolnshire, United Kingdom, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1145/2783446.2783586Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  81. V Thompson. 2016. Black disabled woman syllabus. Ramp Your Voice.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  82. Marianne Upmark, Karin Borg, and Kristina Alexanderson. 2007. Gender differences in experiencing negative encounters with healthcare: A study of long-term sickness absentees. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health 35, 6 (Dec. 2007), 577–584. https://doi.org/10.1080/14034940701362194 Publisher: SAGE Publications Ltd STM.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  83. Suzannah Weiss. 2018. Woman With chronic illness..https://twitter.com/suzannahweiss/status/1052249111225720832?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1052249111225720832&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fhellogiggles.com%2Flifestyle%2Fwomens-pain-dismissed-doctors-twitter%2FGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  84. Susan Wendell. 1996. The Rejected Body: Feminist Philosophical Reflections on Disability. Psychology Press. Google-Books-ID: aoiHCwymEeoC.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  85. Glen W. White, Jamie Lloyd Simpson, Chiaki Gonda, Craig Ravesloot, and Zach Coble. 2010. Moving from Independence to Interdependence: A Conceptual Model for Better Understanding Community Participation of Centers for Independent Living Consumers. Journal of Disability Policy Studies 20, 4 (March 2010), 233–240. https://doi.org/10.1177/1044207309350561 Publisher: SAGE Publications Inc.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  86. Meredith Whittaker, Meryl Alper, Cynthia L Bennett, Sara Hendren, Liz Kaziunas, Mara Mills, and Myers West. 2019. Disability, Bias, and AI. AI Now Institute, November(2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  87. Rua M. Williams and Juan E. Gilbert. 2019. Cyborg Perspectives on Computing Research Reform. In Extended Abstracts of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(CHI EA ’19). Association for Computing Machinery, Glasgow, Scotland Uk, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290607.3310421Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  88. Anon Ymous, Katta Spiel, Os Keyes, Rua M. Williams, Judith Good, Eva Hornecker, and Cynthia L. Bennett. 2020. “I am just terrified of my future”—Epistemic Violence in Disability Related Technology Research. In Extended Abstracts of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(CHI EA ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, Honolulu, HI, USA, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1145/3334480.3381828Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  89. I Zola and Missing Pieces. 1982. A Chronicle of Living with a Disability. Philadelphia.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Living Disability Theory: Reflections on Access, Research, and Design
      Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        ASSETS '20: Proceedings of the 22nd International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility
        October 2020
        764 pages
        ISBN:9781450371032
        DOI:10.1145/3373625

        Copyright © 2020 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 29 October 2020

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article
        • Research
        • Refereed limited

        Acceptance Rates

        ASSETS '20 Paper Acceptance Rate46of167submissions,28%Overall Acceptance Rate436of1,556submissions,28%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      HTML Format

      View this article in HTML Format .

      View HTML Format