Final Data Analysis Paper

Katelyn Pearson

Independent Research I

May 18, 2017

While there are a multitude of inventions that use vibrations to aid deaf people, there has

not been research on how those vibrations may be felt by the people utilizing them. Instead, it

has simply been assumed that deaf people and hearing people feel vibrations the same. This

experiment was conducted to study how vibrations on wrist, lower arm, upper arm, and back of

head are perceived by deaf people to advance the development of mechanical aids for the deaf.

Data was collected on the comfort of vibrations on each location relative to a given scale and the

comparison of vibration comfort between locations by ranking them most to least comfortable.

It was hypothesized that if vibrating motors are placed on the upper arm, lower arm,

wrist, and back of head of deaf and hearing impaired people and vibrated separately at various

intensities, then the back of head will be the most uncomfortable, followed by the wrist, the

lower arm and lastly the upper arm. However, when the experiment was conducted with the help

of six deaf and hard of hearing individuals, the results produced completely refuted the

hypothesis. The order from most to least uncomfortable instead started with the upper arm,

followed by the back of the head, the lower arm, and lastly the wrist. This rift was likely formed

due to the research the hypothesis was based on studying on how hearing people, not deaf

people, feel vibrations. Human error when matching perception with a scale and the small

sample size are also possible factors.

 While human error is inevitable, the small sample size was compensated for by a

collection of two different data sets, one defining the level of comfort at each location and the

other comparing the locations’ comfort. This was established to not only add to the information

collected, but also to create reliability if the data correlated with each other, as it ended up doing.

This is especially apparent when viewing the graphs; they look very similar. This means that the

responses from the participants were not given at random and that the volunteers were at least

somewhat confident in their answers.

Though the consistency between the graphs shows a level of reliability, it is reduced by

the variation shown by the standard deviation bars. The standard deviations bars are used to

demonstrate how consistent each participant’s response is compared to the other responses. In

many cases the standard deviation is very large, showing unreliability. though in cases such as

the comparative comfort of the upper arm and the perceived comfort on the wrist, the standard

deviations are lesser. The small deviation on the upper arm makes that piece of data much more

reliable, and the lack any deviation on the wrist makes this piece of data extremely reliable.

Upon analysis of the possible applications for the results, it was found that each location

would be best suited to different types of assistive devices. The wrist would be the location best

suited for frequent notifications such as baby alerts or cell phone calls. The is because the feeling

of vibrations are minimal in this location, allowing for repeated bursts of vibration throughout

the day with minimal irritation. The lower arm would work well as an alternative for the wrist

due to the similar responses, and an alternative may be needed if the device is too large to fit

around the wrist. In contrast, the upper arm would work best for notifications when a jarring

experience is needed, such as an alarm to wake up. In situations such as these, discomfort would
work well as a motivator to complete a task. Attachment could be made easy with an elastic band

could be used to secure the device and still allow comfortable movement. The head does not

seem to be a very suitable place for an aid due to a wide variation of responses, and as a result it

may be difficult to convey a consistent message.