Disability stigma in many low- and middle-income countries represents one of the most pervasive barriers preventing people with disabilities from accessing equal rights and opportunities, including the uptake of available assistive technology (AT). Previous studies have rarely examined how disability stigma may be shaped through factors endemic to social interactions, including how the use of assistive technology itself may precipitate or alleviate disability stigma. Through two strands of work, we address this gap. Via a series of focus groups with Kenyans without disabilities (Study 1) and secondary data analysis of consultations with Kenyans with disabilities and their allies (Study 2), we identify shared and divergent understandings of what shapes disability stigma and discrimination. Specifically, Kenyans with and without disabilities were cognizant of how religious/spiritual interpretations of disability, conceptions of impairments as “different” from the norm, and social stereotypes about (dis)ability shaped the experience of stigma and discrimination. Moreover, both groups highlighted assistive technology as an influential factor that served to identify or “mark” someone as having a disability. However, whereas participants without disabilities saw assistive technology purely as an enabler to overcome stigma, participants with disabilities also noted that, in some cases, use of assistive technologies would attract stigma from others.

In recent years exoskeletons able to replicate human gait have begun to attract growing popularity for both assistive and rehabilitative purposes. Although wearable robots often need the use of external support in order to maintain stability, the REX exoskeleton by REX Bionics is able to self-balance through the whole cycle. However this statically balanced gait presents important differences with the dynamically balanced gait of human subjects. This paper will examine kinematic and kinetic differences between the gait analysis performed on a subject wearing the REX exoskeleton and human gait analysis data as presented in literature. We will also provide an insight on the impact that these differences can have for both rehabilitative and assistive applications.

Globally, assistive technology (AT) is used by over 1 billion people, but the prevalence of needs and access to AT in specific countries or regions is largely unknown. This scoping review summarise...

Critical voices within and beyond the scientific community have pointed to a grave matter of concern regarding who is included in research and who is not. Subsequent investigations have revealed an extensive form of sampling bias across a broad range of disciplines that conduct human subjects research called “WEIRD”: Western, Educated, Industrial, Rich, and Democratic. Recent work has indicated that this pattern exists within human–computer interaction (HCI) research, as well. How then does human–robot interaction (HRI) fare? And could there be other patterns of sampling bias at play, perhaps those especially relevant to this field of study? We conducted a systematic review of the premier ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (2006–2022) to discover whether and how WEIRD HRI research is. Importantly, we expanded our purview to other factors of representation highlighted by critical work on inclusion and intersectionality as potentially underreported, overlooked, and even marginalized factors of human diversity. Findings from 827 studies across 749 papers confirm that participants in HRI research also tend to be drawn from WEIRD populations. Moreover, we find evidence of limited, obscured, and possible misrepresentation in participant sampling and reporting along key axes of diversity: sex and gender, race and ethnicity, age, sexuality and family configuration, disability, body type, ideology, and domain expertise. We discuss methodological and ethical implications for recruitment, analysis, and reporting, as well as the significance for HRI as a base of knowledge.

Living in an informal settlement with a visual impairment can be very challenging resulting in social exclusion. Mobile phones have been shown to be hugely beneficial to people with sight loss in formal and high-income settings. However, little is known about whether these results hold true for people with visual impairment (VIPs) in informal settlements. We present the findings of a case study of mobile technology use by VIPs in Kibera, an informal settlement in Nairobi. We used contextual interviews, ethnographic observations and a co-design workshop to explore how VIPs use mobile phones in their daily lives, and how this use influences the social infrastructure of VIPs. Our findings suggest that mobile technology supports and shapes the creation of social infrastructure. However, this is only made possible through the existing support networks of the VIPs, which are mediated through four types of interaction: direct, supported, dependent and restricted.