Keywords

1 Introduction

Both the elimination of physical barriers, as well as better adjustment of information system are of key importance in finding ways to increase the availability of open spaces for people with disabilities (PwD). The concept of ‘Accessibility’ in the context of the needs of PwD ‘is defined as meaning that people with disabilities have access, on an equal basis with others, to the physical environment, transportation, information and communications technologies and systems (ICT), and other facilities and services. There are still major barriers in all of these areas. For example, on average in the EU-27, only 5% of public websites comply fully with web accessibility standards, though more are partially accessible’ (European Disability Strategy 2010–2020, p. 5).

A number of measures aimed at increasing accessibility were taken in recent years, also in the sphere of human life associated with high mobility in space, i.e. tourism. The idea of ‘Accessible Tourism’ is widely promoted (Buhalis and Darcy 2011; Buhalis et al. 2012; Gillovic and McIntosh 2015; Zajadacz 2015; World Tourism Organization 2013, 2015, 2016a, b, c). The concept of ‘Accessible Tourism’ refers to the adaptation of environments and of tourism products and services so as to enable access, use and enjoyment by all users, under the principles of Universal Design. ‘This is a form of tourism that involves a collaborative process among stakeholders that enables people with access requirements, including mobility, vision, hearing and cognitive dimensions of access, to function independently and with equity and dignity through the delivery of universally designed tourism products, services and environments’ (World Tourism Organization 2013, p. 4).

The implementation of these goals is possible through the development of ‘communication through digital media. With new, mobile technologies, destinations and providers can reach wider audiences and provide tourists with access to larger amounts of information and also personalised content. This information is more agile and allows customers to compare different offers and services, thus providing them with greater autonomy in their decision-making’ (World Tourism Organization 2016b, p. 4). The search for optimal solutions in the field of information technology addressed to people with a certain type of disability requires, in compliance with the principles of universal active design, the participation of beneficiaries, which corresponds to the assumptions of social IT science.

The article presents the results of research on the multimedia programs addressed to a selected group of tourists with disability – Deaf people, for whom the primary means of communication is sign language. The study focused on both social characteristics of the environment of the Deaf (style of tourist trips, needs for tourist information), as well as on the search for optimal solutions within the information and communication technology (ICT). The assumptions for two multimedia programs SITur and SITex, representing a proposal for automatic translation of texts into Polish Sign Language (PJM), are the outcome of the research. Program names refer to their function as useful tools in the System of Tourist Information: (1) SITur under field conditions (outdoor) and (2) Sitex for exposure indoors. Their implication is aimed at increasing the accessibility of tourism for the community of people who use PJM by eliminating language barriers - to facilitate: (1) access to tourist information for deaf people, as well as (2) passing information in PJM to people working in the service of tourist traffic. The proposed solutions are of innovative character because in Poland so far only solutions such as cooperation with a sign language interpreter or movies with an instructor of sign language were used in terms of facilities of the transmission of tourist information addressed to persons using PJM. They also stress the need to take into account the general problems of the Deaf in activities related to accessible tourism because such activities are often focused only on the physical accessibility (i.e. the needs of people with physical disabilities).

2 Background: Deaf Culture, Deafhood and Tourism of Deaf People

Despite the development of initiatives related to an increase in the availability of tourism for PwD, the tourism of the Deaf rarely was a separate subject of study. One gets the impression that people with hearing impairments or who are Deaf are a group that has been omitted from the tourism literature (Barnes et al. 2010). Tourism, however, is an integral part of social life, so a lot of relevant information to better understand the behavior of tourists who use sign language is also provided through the development of ‘inside Deaf culture’ (Padden and Humphries 1990, 2006; Goodstein 2006; Ladd 2007).

The term ‘Deaf culture’ was developed in the 1970 s to give utterance to the belief that Deaf communities contained their own ways of life mediated through their sign languages’ (Ladd 2007, p. xvii). People with impaired hearing and unable to receive speech through hearing are culturally considered to be Deaf. A characteristic feature of this group is the inability to master oral speech in a natural way, i.e. by imitation. Thus, their natural language is a sign language and, moreover, they share common life experiences (Szczepankowski 1999). For people who use sign language (with a smaller content of signs – ‘words’ in the dictionary and different grammatical structure than the audio language), the national language is largely a ‘second language’, often not quite fully understood (also in the form of text). The perception of Deaf people as those who lost their hearing and who live in ‘a world of silence’ is deeply untrue (Szczepankowski 1999). In fact, as for a hearing person it is normal to hear and speak, and the prospect of hearing loss seems to be a tragedy, for the Deaf from birth, ‘to not hear’ is a natural phenomenon. In their midst, communicating through sign language they are fully operational. What is more, memories of adults, the Deaf children of hearing parents, testify to the fact that at home, they did not perceive their parents as people with disabilities, this experience came only as a result of social relations (Fellinger et al. 2005).

The concept of ‘Deafhood’ in relation to the culture of the Deaf was introduced by Ladd (2007) in the 90s of 20\(^{th}\) century. As he explains, ‘Deafhood is not seen as a finite state but as a process by which Deaf individuals come to actualize their Deaf identity, positing that those individuals construct that identity around several differently ordered sets of priorities and principles, which are affected by various factors such as nation, era, and class’ (Ladd 2007, p. xviii).

The definition of hearing impairment varies in different parts of the world but people with such impairments can be simply thought of as those who have experienced some form of hearing loss and have access needs that require hearing augmentation. Deaf capital D is used specifically as a signifier that this group regard themselves as a distinct cultural group who are unified by the use of sign language. Quite simply, people who are Deaf do not regard themselves as having a disability but as part of a separate cultural group (“Deaf” – see: Woodward 1972; Padden and Humphries 1990, 2006; Ladd 2007; Barnes et al. 2010; Rydberg 2010).

The quality and personalization of the services play the key role in guaranteeing the satisfaction of tourist trips. Creating optimal tourist offer addressed to the segment of the tourism market of Deaf people requires understanding of their needs and expectations (i.e. the diagnosis of tourist demand). Information on style of tourist travel and recreation of the deaf were included in the studies devoted to the social characteristics of this group (including Prillwitz 1996). They were rarely a separate object of study (Zajadacz 2014; Zajadacz and Śniadek 2013). Behavior observed in their free time (i.e. remaining at their disposal) was treated as a kind of indicator of preferred activity. Prillwitz (1996) stated that the way of spending free time by Deaf people shows clearly that Deaf people look primarily for some contact with individuals like themselves. Problems in communication here are almost none, which guarantees comfort and opportunity to rest (Prillwitz 1996, p. 242). Staying in their own environment allows them to rest, especially from the problems arising from restricted communication with the hearing environment. ‘Deaf people refer with great sentiment to meetings in their own environment, which can also be seen from the fact that they do not make similar contacts with the hearing, even when it would possible be on the basis of common interests and because of external circumstances (...) prefer to remain among their own group and freely talk to each other’ (Prillwitz 1996, p. 242). Similarly, with regard to travel and holidays, the author states that Deaf people prefer to spend both weekends and holidays with the family, in the circle of other Deaf people. ‘When they leave for holidays, they rarely come into closer contact with the hearing. (...) Here we have yet another proof of compactness of the community of the deaf, which is perceived as an oasis of respite – be with the deaf it means relax, to be with the hearing it means work!’ (Prillwitz 1996, p. 245).

Satisfaction with the rest, as well as recreational activities in public places, taken by Deaf people, were the subject of research of Oliva (2006) and Atherton (2007). They referred at the same time to the theory of recreation as a personal experience of ‘flow’, ‘flow feelings’ (flow, flow feeling) – a feeling of comfort that is possible when the free choice of a variety of recreational activities is guaranteed, but also full engagement in leisure activities, not only in the role of participant, but also the organizer of recreational outdoor activities, is necessary. At the same time it was emphasized that the possibility of achieving comfort and satisfaction with the rest depends on both of services for the Deaf (e.g. the availability of a sign language interpreter), as well as largely on the individual attitude of the person (acceptance of deafness) – willingness to seek individual ways of development (Ladd 2007). Moreover, the more opportunities the Deaf have to preserve their identity, maintaining both deafness and the resulting language the essence of it, the more chances for comfort they have (Halleux and Poncelet 2001; Hauser et al. 2010). In the case of overcoming the language barrier, the attitude of hearing people who should first come out with the initiative of conversation is vital (Atherton 2007). From the perspective of the Deaf, the use of sign language by hearing people is a sign of respect and is a good base for social integration. Willingness to make conversation, manifested by hearing people is more important than the smooth handling of sign language (Young et al. 2000).

Studies on the tourist activity of disabled people helped to develop a number of treatment-related stays outdoors. For example, Berman and Davis-Berman (1995, pp. 1–7) presented the therapeutic relevance of trips for which people with disabilities were responsible and which were run by them. They emphasized the fact that the natural environment allows for broader treatment than it is possible in the clinic. Terry (1995, p. 26) also presented rehabilitation and therapeutic functions of tourism related to activity and contact with nature. In the case of open-air workshop participants, each victory over themselves, their own limitations raises the level of self-esteem. Furthermore, such activities allow to maintain a high level of involvement of participants in rehabilitation programs (Terry 1995, p. 26). For the organizers of tourism and leisure sets of principles and recommendations taking into account the needs of the Deaf were developed (UK Council on Deafness 2005; Access to the countryside by deaf visitors 2006).

Availability of the offer and customer satisfaction undoubtedly play a fundamental role for the development of tourism referred to as ‘business of dreams’ or ‘business of happiness’. A review of studies concerning tourism and recreation of people using sign language indicates that access to tourist information providing free, independent choice of tourist offer or an individual organization of the trip are the main conditions in this respect. An effective system of tourist information (in terms of scope and content of its forms of communication) is an essential ‘connecting channel’ between creators and recipients of tourist offer. ‘Private companies and public sector stakeholders in tourism must deliver accurate, relevant and timely information to their customers, prior to, during and even after the journey. Ensuring accessible information is without any doubt a key to successfully communicating with visitors in all of the stages of their journey’ (World Tourism Organization 2016b, p. 4). For people who use sign language, communication in the natural language, as well as through texts and graphics, is essential.

3 Objectives and Methods

The main aim of this article is to present the assumptions used in the process of developing and degree of development of two multimedia programs: SITur and SITex, addressed to Deaf tourists, for whom the primary means of communication is PJM. The focus is also on the discussion of results related to the current development stage of programs and indication of further optimal directions of their expansion. The basic assumption of building of the program was the participation of its beneficiaries in the creation of the program.

The study consisted of two stages. The first stage included recognizing the style of leisure and tourist destination of the Deaf against a control group of hearing people in Poland. For the process of data collection (2005–2008) questionnaire interviews were used, which were conducted with the participation of a sign language interpreter [\(n = 292\)]. The studies were conducted in the branches of Polish Association of the Deaf, located in all regions in Poland. The study among hearing people was conducted at the same time [n = 1,780]; they answered the same questions. In both surveys the distribution of basic demographic characteristics had proportional representation (such as age, sex, place of residence). Comparative analysis of expression in both groups showed the specificity of tourism and recreation of the Deaf (i.a. Zajadacz 2010a, 2012). The results indicate that participation in tourism (taking into account the number of tourist trips per year) of Deaf does not differ in a statistically significant way from the studied control group of hearing. The more difficult financial situation of the Deaf, however, affects their travel style (search for cheaper tourist offer, selection of cheap means of transport, closer destinations, more frequent trips off the peak season). In addition, the preference to travel in a group of people with similar characteristics is observed (i.e. the environment of the Deaf), as well as the expectation of the availability of information in graphical form, subtitling and sign language (Zajadacz 2011). Styles of tourist trips were presented in the article ‘Tourism Activities of Deaf Poles’ (Zajadacz and Śniadek 2013) and two monographs (Zajadacz 2010a, 2012). The preferred sources of tourist information used by Deaf people (Zajadacz 2014), the needs in terms of its content and forms of communication were analyzed in detail (Table 1).

Table 1. Sources of information on opportunities for tourism during holidays. Applied abbreviations: \({}^a\) – statistical significance \(p \le 0.05\); ‘D’ – Deaf individuals; ‘H’ – Hearing individuals. Source: Zajadacz 2014: 10.
Full size table

The second stage (2008–2010) included the development of SITur and SITex programs, containing both texts, maps, pictures, pictograms and also PJM animation module, borrowed from Thetos translation program (Zajadacz 2010b). In all stages of the work people using the PJM were directly involved.

4 Results: SITur and SITex Programs Dedicated to Deaf Tourists

Deaf people using the Polish Sign Language (PJM) are featured users of SITur and SITex programs – the ability to read text is not required. However, the programs can also be used by people who are not familiar with the sign language. The programs provide users with a number of presentations. The content of each presentation is divided into chapters, each consisting of one or more slides. Appropriately selected illustrations and textual descriptions for them, and sign language messages equivalent to them in terms of the content, are shown on the slides. The sign content is presented by an avatar, a virtual animated character. Control of the programs (chapter selection, stop, resume of sign presentation and change of its pace etc.) is done by commands passed by a touch screen or using the mouse. The solutions used in the system Thetos (Szmal and Suszczańska 2001; Suszczańska et al. 2004; Romaniuk et al. 2014) [http://thetos.polsl.pl/], including its display and linguistic module, were applied to implement the programs (Szmal 2010).

To implement SITur and SITex, the solutions used in the Thetos system (Szmal and Suszczańska 2001; Suszczańska et al. 2004; Romaniuk et al. 2014) [http://thetos.polsl.pl/] were applied (Szmal 2010). A decisive factor for choosing it was the fact that, at the start of the research related to tourism of the Deaf in Poland (including its limitations and facilities necessary for its development), it was the most extensive system containing PJM translator. Other relevant facilities aimed at passing tourist information to people using PJM included movies with PJM instructor. Such solutions are legible and useful for the Deaf but do not allow automatic translation of the content (texts) into PJM which, in case of changes in the communicated information, creates the need for further recording. Hence, Thetos seemed to be the most promising tool that allows easy (through the introduction of the text) and fast way to transfer information in PJM. Now in a few words we will describe Thetos.

The system consists of two main modules: linguistic and display module. The linguistic module is a rule-based translator from Polish into an intermediate language, which is in fact a textual form of PJM sign language. The module consists of several sub-modules implementing the successive steps of processing the input text – morphological analysis, syntax and semantic analysis, and multistage generation of the output text. During generation, compatibility with the sign language rules is kept. The translator effectively converts a comprehensive set of Polish language structures. It uses extensive electronic dictionaries, including – among others – a morphological dictionary, covering about 90,000 items (words in basic form), and a syntactic-generative dictionary of over 12,000 items (verbs).

The task of the display module of Thetos is to control the movements of the avatar. The module receives the intermediary text which is a sequence of words representing individual signs of the sign language. The words are accompanied by symbols indicating the emotional content associated with specific signs and phrases. The module processes signs in the order they appear in the text. The module uses a dictionary-library of signs; it has about 1500 signs. For known signs, the module plays back the corresponding “atomic” multimedia animations. For unknown signs, it displays their equivalent in the finger alphabet. While playing longer sign sequences, partial animations are seamlessly glued. As for the “atomic” animations, they are prepared by the animator manually (using special supporting tools) basing on actual, filmed signs; the animation takes into account the dynamics of movements.

Let us return to SITur and SITex programs. Unlike the original Thetos system, they do not require translation on-line. For this reason they only include the Thetos display module using the input text in the requested format. This text can be prepared by any technique.

Preparing text for the display module is a key issue. It starts from a text in the (Polish) spoken language; the text is provided by qualified tourist guides or museum curators – the latter if the presentations relate to museum exhibitions. The text is then translated into its textual sign equivalent. The translation could be entirely performed by hand, but this would be a quite tedious task. In order to partly mechanize it, we used the Thetos linguistic module. We employed it for the preparation of a raw version of the translation, which was then manually adjusted and smoothed by a person familiar with PJM. The SITur (Fig. 1) program is designed to bring the content closer in field conditions, tourist trails, and a pilot version includes two routes covering the oldest parts of the city of Poznan (Ostrow Tumski and the Old Market). In turn, the SITex program allows to present exhibition content in stationary conditions (e.g. in museums, galleries, tourist information points, infokiosks).

Fig. 1.
figure 1

The SITur program (sample slides)

Full size image

Both programs are based on the same resource of PJM dictionary of Thetos system. The difference between them lies only in choosing the content relevant to the character of the visited place. Information, in accordance with the suggestions of the deaf, were passed in graphic form: maps, photos, drawings, pictograms and as avatar – PJM translator (Fig. 1).

5 Discussion and Conclusions

Testing the SITur and SITex programs by Deaf people showed, above all, the need to supplement the vocabulary, including words related to tourism. In the pilot form of the programs, in the absence of a relevant sign in the PJM, ideographic signs (conceptual) were replaced by dactylographic signs (spelling words). Tourism is a phenomenon that is growing rapidly, accompanied by the development of new concepts, expressed also in PJM signs. It implies a continuous process of supplementing the dictionary database with PJM signs, on which both programs are based. The first dictionary of sign language in terms of tourist signs was established in Poland in 1981 and included 734 sign language ideographic signs. Until today, a large number of signs related to this subject have been created. The total amount of signs, evaluated 40 years ago at approx. 4000, is currently estimated at more than 7000. The signs are formed as the needs for communicating, acquiring knowledge and mastering new technologies arise. The rapid development of the sign vocabulary occurs in those areas where there is a need or inspiration to define new concepts and, consequently, the creation of new sign language signs. Tourism belongs to such areas today.

The second important issue that drew the attention of users of programs is the need to improve graphics animation, so that avatar’s body language, especially facial expressions, would express the emotions that would be helpful to understand the context of the described contents. The programs therefore require further development in terms of PJM base and plasticizing of animation. In contrast, work on them, especially the testing process, has brought significant social effects.

The employees of the National Museum in Poznan, which was included in the descriptions of the suggested tourist routes, admitted that the project was important to them, primarily due to changes in current beliefs about sharing and popularizing museum exhibits. The way of describing the exhibition has not been determined, as it is usually the case, by the museum and scientific language, typical of the discipline to which collected in the museum exhibits belong. Visitors and their specific language of communication became the priority in this case. The descriptions were adapted to its character, conventions and vocabulary. For some regular visitors, as museum curators noticed, these descriptions seemed too simple and not corresponding to what they were used to. It was assumed, however, that communicating with a diverse group of visitors, including such specific visitors as Deaf people, requires the use of such means of communication that are understood by them. This positive change in attitude towards increasing the availability of museum collections for speakers of PJM encourages to visit the museum those who previously did not feel good in it, mainly because of the way used to communicate with the visitors. According to museum staff, the SITur and SITex programs are likely to become important tools that will bring art and museum closer to the Deaf. Its implementation in the National Museum in Poznan was a significant experience for both employees and visitors to the museum – sensibilizing to the needs of the Deaf.

Summing up the current effects work, it is clear that the series of studies (covering both social problems and IT tools), conducted with the participation of representatives of the people who use sign language, helped to establish the key needs (from their perspective) and desired solutions to increase the availability of tourism (including tourist information system). Moreover, the current level of advancement of the recommended SITur and Sitex programs is too low to make them operate as universal tools working on different routes and in different places or tourist areas. They require first and foremost the development of the system of sign language translation, both in terms of vocabulary and visual expression of the avatar. The selection of interesting sightseeing and hiking content requires continuous cooperation with the Deaf. In addition, proofreading texts in terms of their adaptation to the expectations of the users of sign language is necessary. These tasks are a challenge for the subsequent activities.