Biometrics: Accessibility challenge or opportunity?

• Published in: PloS one Vol. 13; no. 3; p. e0194111
• Main Authors: Blanco-Gonzalo, Ramon, Lunerti, Chiara, Sanchez-Reillo, Raul, Guest, Richard Michael
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Public Library of Science 22.03.2018; Public Library of Science (PLoS)
• Subjects: Access control; Accessibility; Applications programs; ATM; Authentication; Authentication (Identity); Automated teller machines; Biology and Life Sciences; Biometrics; Biometry; Blindness; Computer and Information Sciences; Electronic devices; Engineering and Technology; Engineering schools; Evaluation; Experiments; Handicapped accessibility; Human performance; Human-computer interface; Information technology; International conferences; Internet; Medicine and Health Sciences; Methods; Mobile applications; Mobile commerce; Mobile computing; Pattern recognition; People and Places; Research and Analysis Methods; Smartphones; Social Sciences; Transparency; Usability; New York; United Kingdom > UK; United States > US; Europe
• ISSN: 1932-6203; 1932-6203
• DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0194111

Biometric recognition is currently implemented in several authentication contexts, most recently in mobile devices where it is expected to complement or even replace traditional authentication modalities such as PIN (Personal Identification Number) or passwords. The assumed convenience characteristics of biometrics are transparency, reliability and ease-of-use, however, the question of whether biometric recognition is as intuitive and straightforward to use is open to debate. Can biometric systems make some tasks easier for people with accessibility concerns? To investigate this question, an accessibility evaluation of a mobile app was conducted where test subjects withdraw money from a fictitious ATM (Automated Teller Machine) scenario. The biometric authentication mechanisms used include face, voice, and fingerprint. Furthermore, we employed traditional modalities of PIN and pattern in order to check if biometric recognition is indeed a real improvement. The trial test subjects within this work were people with real-life accessibility concerns. A group of people without accessibility concerns also participated, providing a baseline performance. Experimental results are presented concerning performance, HCI (Human-Computer Interaction) and accessibility, grouped according to category of accessibility concern. Our results reveal links between individual modalities and user category establishing guidelines for future accessible biometric products.