Cultural bias: a comparison of semantic responses by 126 students from Pakistan and the United Kingdom to a wheelchair when viewed against a congruent and incongruent background

References

• Torrens G, Storer I, Asghar S, et al. Social camouflage: a survey of 143 students of their preference for assistive technology cutlery and the visual mechanisms being influenced. In: Ergonomics & human factors (EHF). London (UK): Loughborough University; 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Torrens GE, Asghar S. 20years of the Loughborough User Centred Assistive Technology design process: has it made a difference? Assist Technol. 2022;
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• BusinessWire. Disabled & elderly assistive technologies market [Internet]. San Fransisco (CA): BusinessWire; 2017 [cited 2017 Dec 20]. Available from: https://bit.ly/2YYOpFc.
   Google Scholar
• WHO. Assistive technology: fact sheet [Internet]. Geneva (Switzerland): WHO; 2016 [cited 2017 Dec 20]. Available from: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/assistive-technology/en/.
   Google Scholar
• WHO. Assistive devices/technologies: what WHO is doing [Internet]. Geneva (Switzerland): WHO; 2016 [cited 2017 Dec 20]. Available from: http://www.who.int/disabilities/technology/en/.
   Google Scholar
• WHO. Improving access to assistive technology [Internet]. Geneva (Switzerland): WHO; 2017. [cited 2020 July 28]. Available from: http://applications.emro.who.int/docs/RC64_2017_Tech_Meet_20157_en.pdf?ua=1.
   Google Scholar
• Bispo R, Branco V. Designing out stigma - the role of objects in the construction of disabled people’s identity. Paper presented at: Dare to Desire: 6th International Design & Emotion Conference; 2008 October 6–9; Hong Kong, China.
   Google Scholar
• Parette P, Scherer M. Assistive technology use and stigma. Educ Train Dev Disabil. 2004;39(3):217–226.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Correia de Barros A, Duarte C, Cruz JB. The influence of context on product judgement–presenting assistive products as consumer goods. Int J Des. 2011;5(3):99–112.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ripat J, Woodgate R. The intersection of culture, disability and assistive technology. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2011;6(2):87–96.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Boucher P. Assistive technologies for people with disabilities: in-depth analysis [Internet]. 2018. Published by European Parliamentary Research Service (EPRS) Ref No: PE 603.218. [cited 2019 March 02]. Available from: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/IDAN/2018/603218/EPRS_IDA(2018)603218_EN.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Bos AER, Pryor JB, Reeder GD, et al. Stigma: advances in theory and research. Basic Appl Soc Psych. 2013;35(1):1–9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oliver M. The politics of disablement: critical texts in social work and the welfare state. 1st ed. New York (NY): Palgrave Macmillan; 1990. p. 12–75.
   Google Scholar
• Barnes C, Mercer G. Disability, work, and welfare: challenging the social exclusion of disabled people. Work Employ Soc. 2005;19(3):527–545.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barnes C. Disability and the importance of design for all. J Access Des All. 2011;1(1):55–80.
   Google Scholar
• French S, Swain J. Understanding disability: a guide for health professionals. 1st ed. London (UK): Churchill Livingstone; 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Shakespeare T. Disability: the basic. New York (NY): Routledge; 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Krippendorff K. The semantic turn: a new foundation for design. Vol. 1. New York (NY): CRC Press; 2007. p. 56–59.
   Google Scholar
• Steffen D. Design semantics of innovation: product language as a reflection on technical innovation and socio-cultural change [Internet]. 2010. Germany: Bergische Universität Wuppertal. Available from: http://tiny.cc/9i58pz.
   Google Scholar
• Evans M, Sommerville S. Seeing is believing: the challenge of product semantics in the curriculum. Paper presented at: 9th International Conference on Engineering and Product Design Education; 2007 September 13–14; Newcastle, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Crilly N, Moultrie J, Clarkson PJ. Seeing things: consumer response to the visual domain in product design. Des Stud. 2004;25(6):547–577.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giacomin J. What is design for meaning? J Des Bus Soc. 2017;3(2):167–190.
   Google Scholar
• Robson C, McCartan K. Real world research. 4th ed. London (UK): Wiley; 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Loughborough University. Ethics Approvals (Human Participants) Sub-Committee [Internet]. Loughborough (UK): Loughborough University; 2018 [cited 2017 Aug 30]. Available from: http://www.lboro.ac.uk/committees/ethics-approvals-human-participants/.
   Google Scholar
• Pape TLB, Kim J, Weiner B. The shaping of individual meanings assigned to assistive technology: a review of personal factors. Disabil Rehabil. 2002;24(1–3):5–20.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kintsch A, Depaula R. A framework for the adoption of assistive technology [Internet]. 2002. In Proceedings: StateWide Assistive Technology, Augmentative and Alternative Communication Symposium, Denver, Colorado. [cited 2018 June 12]. Available from: http://l3d.cs.colorado.edu/clever/assets/pdf/ak-SWAAAC02.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Stockton G. Stigma: addressing negative associations in product design. Paper presented at: International Conference on Engineering and Product Design Education; 2009 September 10–11; Brighton, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Boiani JAM, Barili SRM, Medola FO, et al. On the non-disabled perceptions of four common mobility devices in Norway: a comparative study based on semantic differentials. Technol Disabil. 2019;31(1–2):15–25.
   Google Scholar
• Spinelli G, Micocci M, Martin W, et al. From medical devices to everyday products: exploring cross-cultural perceptions of assistive technology. Des Heal. 2019;3(2):324–340.
   Google Scholar
• Spinelli G, Micocci M, Tsekleves E, et al. Contemporary themes in the design of at for the ageing population: materiality, co-design and cultural influences. In: Design of assistive technology for ageing populations. Basel (Switzerland): Springer Nature; 2020. p. 41–52.
   Google Scholar
• Nisbett RE, Norenzayan A. Culture and cognition. In: Stevens’ handbook of experimental psychology. 3rd ed. Hoboken (NJ): John Wiley & Sons; 2002.
   Google Scholar
• Senzaki S, Masuda T, Ishii K. When is perception top-down and when is it not? Culture, narrative, and attention. Cogn Sci. 2014;38(7):1493–1506.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nisbett RE. The geography of thought. New York (NY): The Free Press; 2003. p. 288.
   Google Scholar
• Jenkins LJ, Yang YJ, Goh J, et al. Cultural differences in the lateral occipital complex while viewing incongruent scenes. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2010;5(2–3):236–241.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boland JE, Nisbett R. How we see it: culturally different eye movement patterns over visual scenes. 2015. Cognitive and cultural influences on eye movements. 2015; p. 363–378. [cited 2018 January 3]. Available from: https://sites.lsa.umich.edu/jeboland-lab/wp-content/uploads/sites/606/2018/05/BolandChuaNisbett08.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Masuda T, Nisbett RE. Attending holistically vs. analytically: comparing the context sensibility of Japanese and Americans. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2001;81(5):922–934.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kelly DJ, Miellet S, Caldara R. Culture shapes eye movements for visually homogeneous objects. Front Psychol. 2010;1:1–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chua HF, Boland JE, Nisbett RE. Cultural variation in eye movements during scene perception. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2005;102(35):12629–12633.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldstein E, Masuda T. Cultural effects on visual perception. Encyclopedia of Perception. 2013:1–9. SAGE Publisher.
   Google Scholar
• Miyamoto Y, Nisbett RE, Masuda T. Culture and the physical environment. Psychol Sci. 2006;17(2):113–119.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ji LJ, Zhang Z, Nisbett RE. Is it culture or is it language? Examination of language effects in cross-cultural research on categorization. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2004;87(1):57–65.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goh JO, Tan JC, Park DC. Culture modulates eye-movements to visual novelty. PLoS One. 2009;4(12):e8238.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goto SG, Ando Y, Huang C, et al. Cultural differences in the visual processing of meaning: detecting incongruities between background and foreground objects using the N400. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2010;5(2–3):242–253.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ho CH, Lu YN. Can pupil size be measured to assess design products? Int J Ind Ergon. 2014;44(3):436–441.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huettig F, Altmann GTM. Word meaning and the control of eye fixation: semantic competitor effects and the visual world paradigm. Cognition. 2005;96(1):B23–B32.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guo F, Ding Y, Liu W, et al. Can eye-tracking data be measured to assess product design?: visual attention mechanism should be considered. Int J Ind Ergon. 2016;53:229–235.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lai ML, Tsai MJ, Yang FY, et al. A review of using eye-tracking technology in exploring learning from 2000 to 2012. Educ Res Rev. 2013;10(88):90–115.
   Google Scholar
• Osgood CE, Suci GJ, Tannenbaum PH. The measurement of meaning. 2nd ed. Urbana (IL), Chicago (IL), London (UK): University of Illinois Press; 1957. p. 76–127.
   Google Scholar
• Osgood CE. Semantic differential technique in the comparative study of cultures. Am Anthropol. 2009;66(3):171–200.
   Google Scholar
• Petiot JF, Yannou B. Measuring consumer perceptions for a better comprehension, specification and assessment of product semantics. Int J Ind Ergon. 2004;33(6):507–525.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Artacho-Ramirez MA, Diego-Mas JA, Alcaide-Marzal J. Influence of the mode of graphical representation on the perception of product aesthetic and emotional features: an exploratory study. Int J Ind Ergon. 2008;38(11–12):942–952.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malhotra NK. Marketing research - an applied orientation. 6th ed. Hoboken (NJ): Pearson; 2010. p. 257–279.
   Google Scholar
• Fellinghauer BAG, Roth A, Bugari K, et al. Construct validity, test-retest reliability, and internal consistency of the Photo Elicitation Semantic Differential Scale (PESD) in disability studies. J Dev Phys Disabil. 2011;23(3):257–265.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moon H, Park J, Kim S. The importance of an innovative product design on customer behavior: development and validation of a scale. J Prod Innov Manag. 2015;32(2):224–232.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asghar S, Torrens G, Iftikhar H, et al. The influence of social context on the perception of assistive technology: using a Semantic Differential Scale to compare young adults’ views from the United Kingdom and Pakistan. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2020;15(5):563–576.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asghar S, Torrens G, Harland R. Cultural influences on perception of disability and disabled people: a comparison of opinions from students in the United Kingdom (UK) Pakistan (PAK) about a generic wheelchair using a semantic. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2020;15(3):292–304.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lanutti JNL, Medola FO, Gonçalves DD, et al. The significance of manual wheelchairs: a comparative study on male and female users. Procedia Manuf. 2015;3:6079–6085.
   Google Scholar
• Evans K, Rotello CM, Li X, et al. Scene perception and memory revealed by eye movements and receiver-operating characteristic analyses: does a cultural difference truly exist? Q J Exp Psychol. 2009;6(11):1249–1254.
   Google Scholar
• Oxford University Press. Lexico by Oxford [Internet]. London (UK): OUP; 2020 [cited 2020 May 11]. Available from: https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/iconography.
   Google Scholar
• Harland R, Liguori A. Traces of fascist urban iconography in the Latina Province, Italy. Paper presented at: The International Association for Media and Communication Research (IAMCR); 2016 July 27–31. Leicester, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Ho H. The effects of controlling visual attention to handbags for women in online shops: evidence from eye movements. Comput Human Behav. 2014;30:146–152.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karjalainen T. It looks like a Toyota: educational approaches to designing for visual brand recognition. Int J Des. 2007;1(1):67–81.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asghar S, Torrens G, Iftikhar H, et al. Cultural blindness: eye-tracking trial of visual attention towards assistive technology (at) product, by students from the UK and Pakistan. Paper presented at: International Association of Societies of Design Research Conference 2019; 2019 September 2–5; Manchester, UK.
   Google Scholar
• Asghar S. Cross-cultural product semantics: a comparative investigation between the UK and Pakistan into the sociocultural meanings ascribed to digital images (a case study of manual wheelchair design) 2020:180–279. Loughborough University. Thesis. Available from: https://repository.lboro.ac.uk/articles/thesis/Cross-cultural_product_semantics_a_comparative_investigation_between_the_UK_and_Pakistan_into_the_sociocultural_meanings_ascribed_to_digital_images_a_case_study_of_manual_wheelchair_design_/13317896.
   Google Scholar
• Nisbett RE, Masuda T. Culture and point of view. Biol Cult Bases Hum Inference. 2003;100(10):11163–11170.
   Google Scholar
• Kastanakis MN, Voyer BG. The effect of culture on perception and cognition: a conceptual framework. J Bus Res. 2014;67(4):425–433.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ekstrom LB, Roelfsema PR, Arsenault JT, et al. Bottom-up dependent gating of frontal signals in early visual cortex. PLoS One. 2008;32(7):736–740.
   Google Scholar
• Beck DM, Kastner S. Top-down and bottom-up mechanisms in biasing competition in the human brain. Vision Res. 2009;49(10):1154–1165.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar