taken from the Braille monitor, February 2015.
Digital Braille Versus Paper Braille
by Christian Coudert
From the Editor: Christian Coudert is the editor in chief of the
Louis Braille magazine (Paris, France). He has done some interesting
research about the reading of Braille from paper and from refreshable
Braille displays. Some of the findings from his study are surprising and
may provide helpful guidance for those considering whether to purchase a
refreshable display or a Braille notetaker and how many cells it should
have. We have removed parts of the article that describe how to simulate
the tests done in reaching these results and have tried to smooth a few
rough edges that resulted from translation of this article from French to
English. Here is what he says:
Let me recount how I came up with the idea of writing this article:
since I have had a Braille notetaker, I have gradually given up reading
on
paper, preferring electronic Braille. However, without taking the trouble
to check it, I have always been convinced that reading on paper must
unquestionably be much more effective. Indeed, whereas both hands can be
used for reading on paper (the left hand reading the next line while the
right hand ends the current line), this method cannot be applied to
paperless Braille because you have to press a navigation button on the
device to display the text below once you have finished reading the
content
of the Braille display. Another preconception has always led me to think
that the more Braille cells we have (up to a point), the faster our
reading
speed will be.
In order to check the validity of these assumptions, I decided to
perform an experiment with a panel of volunteer readers. This study does
not claim to be scientific. To have true scientific validity, it would
have
been necessary to select a group of readers and have each of them read
the
same texts during several timed sessions, assign everyone the same
electronic equipment, and refine the results, taking into account each
reader's age and length of Braille experience. However, the number of
readers involved and the number of reading sessions undertaken enable us
to
draw what we believe to be objective conclusions that would likely be
confirmed by other studies.
Before getting into the details of the study, let me make it clear
that I do not write with the purpose of promoting one reading mode over
another. All reading systems are complementary; each person chooses the
system that suits him or her, based on factors such as fixed location or
travelling, the availability of various formats for a given title,
budgetary constraints, and so on. It is also true that a large majority
of
sighted readers who use digital tablets do not use them exclusively,
seeing
no need to give up paper and generally seeing no need to decide which
method is better-they let the content and other factors determine how
they
will read.
There is no doubt that a Braille reader must first master reading
on
paper to understand fully the concepts of pages and paragraphs and enjoy
the benefits of the various layouts used in this medium (title centering,
line breaks, paragraphs, lists, and poetry layout). On a Braille display,
where text blocks of eighteen, twenty, or thirty-two cells follow each
other, most of these markers disappear. Hence, learning Braille, like
learning to write, is best done with a solid background in paper Braille.
For our tests we chose to use Braille notetakers rather than
standalone Braille displays because the notetakers are designed for
reading
text, whereas standalone Braille displays are designed for displaying the
contents of computer screens and contain more Braille cells. Readers used
their own equipment, and, when they wished, equipment was lent to them.
When we crunched the numbers after each reader went through several
sessions reading from paper, an eighteen-cell display, and a thirty-two-
cell display, we were a little surprised by what the numbers revealed.
Half
of the readers had a slightly faster reading speed on paper than on a
Braille display, but the difference was very small, almost to the point
of
insignificance. The difference in reading speed for each individual
reader
between his or her fastest and slowest speed was rather low, with the
exception of one reader, who had a difference of thirty-four words per
minute between his fastest and slowest speeds. This indicates that the
reading pace is not fundamentally altered by using a device instead of
paper Braille.
Strengths of Paper
One achieves a high reading speed and comprehension when reading
with
both hands because of the ability to begin reading the next line. Blank
lines can be easily skipped, and knowing the boundaries of a page is
easy.
The spatial representation of the page communicates the layout and the
importance of empty lines, indented lists, and other formatting is easily
understood.
Weaknesses of Paper
With paper Braille, fragility (dots get deleted over time) can
become
a barrier to rapid reading. The bulkiness of paper requires significant
space for storage. Size can also make finding a large enough reading
space
difficult, especially while traveling.
Strengths of a Notetaker
Braille in a digital format means the reader has a large number of
works available, whether through books prepared for digital Braille or
books with letter-for-letter presentation which are translated by the
notetaker. The notetaker provides a text-search facility, which partially
offsets the difficulty in skipping multiple pages or finding a page by
its
number. Of course one also has the advantage of being able to search for
a
wanted word or phrase. The compact size of the notetaker means it can be
used where space is limited, and, since books are stored digitally, the
unit can hold many titles. Our readers made the point that these devices
allow one to read anywhere, including standing in the tube [the mass
transit trains in France].
Weaknesses of Reading Braille on Refreshable Braille Displays
One can waste time reading if the text is not properly formatted
for
Braille or converted by the translation and formatting programs inside
the
display. Reading can be hampered when lines are formatted specifically
for
print, contain hyphens to indicate the end of print lines where no such
hyphenation is required on the Braille display, and by the presence of
print page numbers that serve little purpose. Some of the information
conveyed in the printed or the paper Braille is lost when using a Braille
display and can interfere with both reading speed and comprehension. The
Braille display can eliminate information essential in the reading of
tables and Braille music, but for literature these formatting
considerations are less critical.
Our Findings
This study shows that the average reading speed on paper is
equivalent to that obtained on eighteen-cell notetakers (120
words/minute).
It is slightly higher than that on thirty-two-cell devices (4 percent).
The
perception we have of our reading speed is distorted by a set of factors
we
were not aware of but which were disclosed by this experiment: the dot
quality on piezoelectric displays largely offsets the disadvantages of a
reading process of real two-handed reading on paper. In addition,
electronic Braille frees the reader from the need to turn paper pages,
the
problem that arises when Braille is close to the fold of a magazine or
soft-
bound book, and the problem that results when having so little reading
space means one has no place for the opposing page.
In order for reading with a Braille display to be comfortable and
efficient, it is important to be sitting comfortably and find the
position
that lessens or eliminates wrist, upper limb, and back fatigue. Placing
the
device flat on a table is not always the best solution. It is also
important to set one's Braille notetaker to maximize its ability to
display
given types of information. If knowing about blank lines is not
important,
turn on the function which suppresses them. If multiple spaces between
words are not required for understanding the document, turn on the
feature
to compress the information and make the most of the cells on the
display.
We observe that devices with front panel buttons provide the best
ergonomic
experience since scrolling the text with the thumbs is more natural than
pressing a button at the end of a display.
Our study shows that using a display with a larger number of cells
does not necessarily increase the reading speed: fatigue is usually
greater
on thirty-two-cell equipment than on those with eighteen or twenty cells
because of the greater movement of the hands which is required.
We have not yet mentioned the observations made by those attempting
to use automatic reading. This function, available on all notetakers,
automatically scrolls the display at a speed determined by the user. We
found that the use of this feature significantly decreases reading speed
because scrolling of the display is based on time rather than on the
number
of characters displayed. In cases where the display contains a small
amount
of text, perhaps as little as one or two words, much time is wasted
waiting
for the next forward movement through the text. Manufacturers should
consider improving this function by seeing that each line contains as
much
text as it can accommodate and by speeding up the pace of the forward
movement when fewer characters are displayed.
I would like to thank all the readers who agreed to take part in
this
experiment. The results speak for themselves and should encourage Braille
producers to offer more digital books in Braille. Braille readers who
currently use paper should consider adopting refreshable Braille displays
because they offer so much access to the written word, ease of transport,
instant access (no delay waiting for parcels to be delivered), easy
navigation when searching a digitized document, the ability to add
markers
for bookmarks on places where one needs to return, and archiving books
and
magazines without any deterioration over time and without the significant
amount of space required by their bulk. We sincerely hope the price of
equipment will fall significantly so that more readers around the world
can
benefit from them.
I extend my warm thanks to Alain and Brian, who made the
translation
from French.
Register at the dedicated AccessIndia list for discussing accessibility
of
mobile phones / Tabs on:
http://mail.accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/mobile.accessindia_accessindia.org.in
Search for old postings at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/accessindia@accessindia.org.in/
To unsubscribe send a message to
accessindia-requ...@accessindia.org.in
with the subject unsubscribe.
To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes,
please
visit the list home page at
http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in
Disclaimer:
1. Contents of the mails, factual, or otherwise, reflect the thinking of
the
person sending the mail and AI in no way relates itself to its veracity;
2. AI cannot be held liable for any commission/omission based on the
mails
sent through this mailing list..
