Opinions and Preferences of Blind and Low Vision Consumers Regarding Self-Driving Vehicles: Results of Focus Group Discussions
Julian Brinkley, Brianna Posadas, Julia Woodward, Juan E. Gilbert · 2017 · Proceedings of the 19th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS '17) · doi:10.1145/3132525.3132532
Summary
This paper explores the opinions, concerns, and preferences of 38 blind and low vision participants regarding self-driving vehicle technology through eight focus group sessions conducted over two days in north central Florida. Participants had a mean age of 51.5 (range 18-90), with 22 identifying as blind and 16 as low vision. The study was motivated by the observation that while self-driving vehicles hold enormous mobility potential for people who cannot operate conventional cars, little research had explored the specific needs and perspectives of this population. Focus groups followed a semi-structured script covering awareness of the technology, hopes and concerns, accessibility considerations, legal and licensing opinions, interaction preferences, purchase considerations, and risk/trust attitudes. Follow-up telephone interviews were conducted 3-5 days later. Transcripts were analysed qualitatively using MAXQDA, with two researchers independently coding and a third resolving disagreements. Six major themes emerged from 690 coded comments: self-driving vehicle concerns (223 mentions), potential benefits (151), licensing and training (121), human-machine interface (88), purchase considerations (74), and risk and trust (33).
Key findings
Participants were overwhelmingly optimistic about the mobility and independence potential of self-driving vehicles, with 97% responding positively. Forty-seven percent specifically referenced "independence" — the ability to travel without relying on friends, family, or public transportation. Participants described how inability to drive affects where they live, their diet, medical care, employment, and social connections. However, 57% felt their needs were not being adequately considered by manufacturers, drawing on negative past experiences with other technologies (e.g., quiet hybrid vehicles being dangerous for pedestrians). Key concerns included: location verification (53% wanted systems to confirm arrival at the correct destination), parking and orientation (44% worried about navigating from the parking spot to a building entrance), situational awareness (45% wanted real-time information about surroundings, other vehicles, and obstacles), interaction with non-autonomous vehicles (63% were skeptical about safety in mixed traffic), and roadside assistance (39% questioned how to get help during breakdowns). For human-machine interface, 71% anticipated speech input, but many preferred smartphone-based control over in-vehicle touchscreens — blind participants were strongly resistant to touchscreens, while low vision participants were more open to them as backups. Regarding licensing, 55% were concerned that driver's license requirements could exclude them; most groups converged on the idea of an "operator's license" earned through training. On risk and trust, most participants viewed self-driving vehicles as no riskier than riding with human drivers.
Relevance
This study fills a critical gap in autonomous vehicle research by centring the voices of people who stand to benefit most from the technology but are rarely consulted in its development. For accessibility practitioners and automotive designers, the findings reveal that the challenge extends far beyond the vehicle itself: the entire journey — from locating the vehicle in a parking lot, to verifying arrival at the correct destination, to navigating from the drop-off point to a building entrance — must be addressed. The "last metre" problem (getting from vehicle to final destination) was as concerning to participants as the driving itself. The study also highlights the disconnect between manufacturer assumptions and user needs: in-vehicle touchscreens, which are standard in autonomous vehicle prototypes, are inaccessible to many blind users. The strong preference for smartphone interaction reflects blind users' existing accessibility investment in their personal devices. Limitations include the geographic concentration (north central Florida), self-selected sample, and the fact that none of the participants had first-hand experience with self-driving vehicles, meaning opinions were based on expectations rather than experience.
Tags: blindness · low vision · autonomous vehicles · accessible transportation · mobility · independence · user research · focus groups