john Gill technology header image
Name of Report and Author: Identification of Accessibility Issues for Visually Impaired Users of Biometric Technologies: Fingerprint Readers by Antoinette Fennell

November 2006


Contents

Full Contents

List of Tables

List of Figures

 

Full Contents

1. Introduction

1.1. Biometrics

1.2 Biometric Systems

1.2.1. Fingerprints

1.2.1.1. Fingerprint readers

1.2.1.2. Problems predicted with fingerprint readers

2. Methods

2.1. Test Subjects

2.2. Fingerprint Readers

2.2.1. Terminology used in this report

2.2.2. The IBM Reader

2.2.3. The Hamster Reader

2.2.4. The Microsoft Reader

2.3 Fingerprint Reader Task Analysis

2.4 Statistical Analysis

3. Results

3.1 Finger chosen to enroll

3.2 Task analysis

3.2.1. Task 1: Did the user automatically know what finger

3.2.1.1. Readers analysed individually

3.2.1.2. Readers compared for Task 1

3.2.1.3. Task 1 results summary

3.2.2. Task 2: Did the user automatically know how to interact with the reader?

3.2.2.1. Readers analysed individually

3.2.2.2. Readers compared for Task 2

3.2.2.3. Task 2 results summary

3.2.3. Task 3: Could the user correctly interact with the scanner once the manufacturer's instructions were read or called out?

3.2.3.1. Readers analysed individually

3.2.3.2. Readers compared for Task 3

3.2.3.3. Task 3 results summary

3.2.4. Task 4: Could the user correctly interact with the scanner once more detailed instructions were provided by the evaluator?

3.2.4.1. Readers analysed individually

3.2.4.2. Task 4 results summary

3.2.5. Task 5: Did the user have success on the very first scan? 3.2.5.1. Readers analysed individually

3.2.5.2. Readers compared for Task 5

3.2.5.3. Task 5 results summary

3.2.6. Task 6: Did the user experience at least one successful scan (i.e. a single image successfully taken) after the manufacturer's instructions were provided?

3.2.6.1. Readers analysed individually

3.2.6.2. Readers compared for Task 6

3.2.6.3. Task 6 results summary

3.2.7. Task 7: Did the user experience at least one successful scan (i.e. a single image successfully taken) after more detailed instructions were provided?

3.2.7.1. Readers analysed individually

3.2.7.2. Readers compared for Task 7

3.2.7.3. Task 7 results summary

3.2.8. Task 8: Did the user automatically know that more than one scan is taken for enrolment?

3.2.8.1. Readers analysed individually

3.2.9. Task 9: Was the registration process eventually successful (i.e. did the user do everything required for the fingerprint enrolment process to be a success at least once)?

3.2.9.1. Readers analysed individually

3.2.9.2. Readers compared for Task 9

3.2.9.3. Task 9 results summary

3.2.10. Task 10: Did the test subjects recognise when a scan was unsuccessful?

3.2.10.1. Readers analysed individually

3.2.10.2. Task 10 results summary

3.2.11. Task 11: When a scan was unsuccessful, did the test subject know why? 

3.2.11.1. Readers analysed individually

3.2.11.2. Task 11 results summary

3.3. Evaluation of the instructions

4. Discussion, Conclusions and Guidelines

4.1. Problems identified with fingerprint readers

4.1.1. Problems with instructions

4.1.2. Problems encountered when positioning the finger into the correct area on the reader

4.1.3. Problems recognising a success or failure

4.1.4 Problems with not understanding why a scan failed

4.2. Guidelines

4.2.1. Making the reader easier to locate

4.2.2. Improving the accessibility of the fingerprint reader design

4.2.3. Providing instructions in an accessible format

4.2.4. Informing the user that the reader is waiting for him/her to take action

4.2.5. Catering for users who do not require audio instructions (e.g. those who have good vision, or those who are familiar with the process)

5. Acknowledgements

6. Bibliography

Appendix 1

List of Tables

Table 1. Summary of the age and gender distributions of the n = 40 test subjects.

Table 2. Descriptive statistics of the task analysis for the three fingerprint readers showing the percentages of success and failure in each task for visually impaired test subjects.

Table 3. Descriptive statistics of the task analysis for the three fingerprint readers showing the percentages of success and failure in each task for the test subjects with good vision.

Table 4. Table showing the VI test subject results for each task. The data are summarised as 'Yes' (indicating a majority of successes), 'No' (indicating a majority of failures) or 'Equal' (indicating an equal number of successes and failures).

Table 5. Table showing the good vision test subject results for each task. The data are summarised as 'Yes' (indicating a majority of successes), 'No' (indicating a majority of failures) or 'Equal' (indicating an equal number of successes and failures).

Table 6: Results of pairwise analysis comparing the scan success rates before and after instructions were provided to the visually impaired test subjects.

Table 7: Results of pairwise analysis comparing the scan success rates before and after instructions were provided to the test subjects with good vision.

 

List of Figures

Figure 1. Photograph of the IBM fingerprint reader. The number 1 points towards the indented circle, the number 2 points towards the scanner area through which the capacitive sensor takes a scan of the fingerprint.

Figure 2. A screenshot of the IBM reader instructions providing the option to select a finger to enroll.

Figure 3. A screenshot of the IBM reader instructions after one successful fingerprint image has been taken.

Figure 4. A screenshot of the IBM reader instructions after the fingerprint has been successfully enrolled.

Figure 5. Photograph of the Hamster fingerprint reader. The number 1 points towards the scanner area through which the optical sensor takes a scan of the fingerprint.

Figure 6. A screenshot of the Hamster reader instructions providing the option to select a finger to enroll.

Figure 7. A screenshot of the Hamster reader instructions after one successful fingerprint image has been taken.

Figure 8. A screenshot of the Hamster reader instructions after the fingerprint has been successfully enrolled.

Figure 9. Photograph of the Microsoft fingerprint reader. The number 1 points towards the scanner area through which the optical sensor takes a scan of the fingerprint.

Figure 10. A screenshot of the Microsoft reader instructions providing the option to select a finger to enroll.

Figure 11. A screenshot of the Microsoft reader instructions after one successful fingerprint image has been taken.

Figure 12. A screenshot of the Microsoft reader instructions after the fingerprint has been successfully enrolled.

 

 



John Gill Technology Limited Footer
John Gill Technology Limited Footer