「科技是我身體的一部分」：障礙者的科技使用經驗

Technology is Part of My Body: Experiences of Disabled People Using Technology

科技的發展為障礙者在日常生活中帶來許多助益，包含融入職場與校園、自立生活及積極參與社會。然而，科技除了使用上的助力外，也衍生新興的阻礙。本研究立基於障礙解放學研究取向，目的為理解障礙者主觀詮釋科技的使用經驗，並以社會模式探討障礙者與科技使用的互動與交織樣態。2018 年 5 月至 2019 年 5 月間以半結構訪談大綱深度訪談 9 位跨障別障礙者（含肢體、視覺、聽覺與口語障礙者），以主題分析法進行資料分析。歸納障礙者對於使用科技的經驗為：科技是我身體的一部分、科技是我的第二個生日與重要他人、科技使用衍生的家庭衝突、缺乏障礙者為主體參與的科技設計；亦即，障礙者與科技間存在緊密且多元的互動關係，科技的使用對障礙者來說是助力亦是阻力。本研究建議未來探討障礙者使用科技的經驗及相關科技開發時，應強調以障礙者為主體的需求與思維，去除輔具輔助概念的標籤化，避免落入矯治的醫療模式觀點及污名化的再製。

The development of technology has brought benefits for disabled people in everyday life, including better engagement in education and employment, as well as a fuller realization of independent living and social participation. However, using technology might also bring barriers for disabled people in their daily lives.
The notion of “nothing about us without us” has been gradually emphasized in disability research. Roulstone (2016) raised the potential deficiency by only employing a medical model to evaluate the use of technology in addressing the lack of subjective perspectives of disabled people. Barnes (2003), Walmsley (2001), and Chou (2017) supported the idea of empowering disabled people in disability studies, but research on the voice of disabled people has remained unheard.
In resonance with the emancipatory disability research and to fill the gap of previous research, this study employs a qualitative method based on the social model, emphasizing the experiences of disabled people using technology by interviewing them. An in-depth and semi-structured interview was employed each participant between May 2018 and May 2019. The participants included nine disabled people with different disabilities, such as physical, visual, hearing, and communication. Every one of the participants thoroughly went through the interview and provided his or her personal experiences and insights. In addition, by analyzing the results of each interview, the authors further derived vital issues on how technology shapes the everyday life of disabled people.
After a thorough research process, the authors realized that the interplay between disabled people and technology is multi-faceted and intertwined with each other in a complicated manner. Among the nuances that showed up in the interview results, four themes have been synthesized in this study:
•Technology is part of the body of disabled people.
•Technology is one of the significant others for disabled people, granting them second lives. •Technology brings tension between disabled people and their family members when introducing technology into their lives.
•The opinions or perspectives of disabled people are usually not included in the designing and developing processes.
From the participants’ point of view, technology is a tool in their daily lives and a part of their bodies. When recognizing technology as their own feet, ears, or eyes, disabled people have redefined the meaning of using technology, leaving them no more special than others. Through interaction with technology, disabled people have been encouraged to be more independent and motivated in living out their lives by cultivating a personified relationship with technology that was conventionally recognized as only a tool.
Second, disabled people have also defined technology as significant others, granting them second lives. Participants shed light on the benefits of utilizing technology by sharing their experiences. Now, they enjoy more opportunities than ever. For example, with the assistance of technology, they can make their own decisions and move around more freely. They have even recognized technology as their “partner” who accompanies them and provides them with personal support. Moreover, technology has inspired disabled people to embrace opportunities for further possibilities and creativity.
Nevertheless, although technology supports disabled people, it also creates barriers for them in many aspects. For example, regarding the benefits, technology brings opportunities for disabled people to live a different yet meaningful life; conversely, technology might invite pity and presumptions. As illustrated in the interview results, the care and constraint, in particular, become the tensions between disabled people and their family members when it comes to introducing technology into the lives of disabled people. Most of their family members think that disabled people need to be protected or cannot deal with dangers in a social environment on their own. According to the participants, they have been facing worries and blame from their families. Because of these concerns, even though disabled people now have more chances to get involved in society by using technology, they are still not allowed to be fully independent. In short, lacking empathy for disabled people and ignoring their needs in using technology has made disabled people feel uncomfortable and stressed.
In addition, each disabled person has different needs, and including the concept of user-centered product design and development processes is often challenging. For example, the absence of participation or exclusion of the needs of disabled people leads to a negative response from the market to disabled people regarding their genuine and practical needs.
To conclude, this study has gone beyond a medical model and extended the proposed ideas of the emancipatory disability research while building up the research method based on the concept of the social model. Based on the study results, it is suggested that researchers or experts consider the social contexts when attempting to provide an in-depth understanding of the interplay between technology and disability. Four vital issues that can help in the future introduction of technology to disabled people are addressed in detail for further studies. Moreover, policies and practices related to disability and technology should center on the needs and experiences of disabled people, making the implications more considerate.