How Can Haptic Feedback Assist People with Blind and Low Vision (BLV): A Systematic Literature Review

TL;DR

This work addresses the gap in understanding how haptic feedback and on-body stimulation can support BLV individuals across tasks. It employs a PRISMA-based systematic literature review of 132 papers (2004–2024) to map haptic tool types, feedback modalities, and stimulation sites to four BLV-relevant tasks. The study identifies hardware, functionality, and UX/evaluation limitations and outlines concrete directions—such as embracing multimodal feedback, refining wearable form factors, and expanding underexplored stimulation sites—to strengthen future assistive haptic technologies. Overall, the findings offer a comprehensive blueprint for designing more effective, user-centered haptic aids that integrate with audio cues and real-world use, advancing accessibility for BLV users.

Abstract

People who are blind or have low vision (BLV) encounter numerous challenges in their daily lives and work. To support them, various haptic assistive tools have been developed. Despite these advancements, the effective utilization of these tools -- including the optimal haptic feedback and on-body stimulation positions for different tasks along with their limitations -- remains poorly understood. Recognizing these gaps, we conducted a systematic literature review spanning two decades (2004-2024) to evaluate the development of haptic assistive tools within the HCI community. Our findings reveal that these tools are primarily used for understanding graphical information, providing guidance and navigation, and facilitating education and training, among other life and work tasks. We identified three main limitations: hardware limitations, functionality limitations, and UX and evaluation methods limitations. Based on these insights, we discuss potential research avenues and offer suggestions for enhancing the effectiveness of future haptic assistive technologies.

Figures (21)

• Figure 1: Four steps of literature review's PRISMA procedure: identification, screening, eligibility, and included.
• Figure 2: Findings reported from three main perspectives and limitations. Each section was further divided into subsections.
• Figure 3: Examples of haptic assistive tools designed for the four main types of tasks. The connections show which haptic tools assist the specific BLV tasks.
• Figure 4: Examples of tactile graphics/maps: a) Linespace: a refreshable tactile graphic system based on 3D printers swaminathan2016linespace; b) a mobile audio-tactile system for learning graphics at schools melfi2020understanding; c) 3D Building Plans: a 3D-printed multi-story building tactile map for O&M education. The figure shows one of the three designs in which the users can slide away each layer of the tactile map Nagassa20233D.
• Figure 5: Examples of 3D models: a) TactIcons: 3D printed icons that can substitute visual icons for street and park tactile maps holloway2023tacticons; b) TangibleCircuits: a haptic and audio feedback device based on 3D models that allow users with BLV to understand circuit diagrams davis2020tangible; c) Tangible Desktop: 3D-printed icons for multimodal interaction of computers. Each icon has an RFID tag embedded inside and a tactilely distinct rubber crown baldwin2017the.