"I Don't Trust Any Professional Research Tool": A Re-Imagination of Knowledge Production Workflows by, with, and for Blind and Low-Vision Researchers

2026-02-09

AI Summary

This study addresses the systemic exclusion of blind and low-vision (BLV) researchers in vision-centric scientific workflows, revealing that nearly one-fifth are unable to independently conduct literature reviews or evaluate visual research outputs. Employing an explanatory sequential mixed-methods design, the research combines a cross-sectional survey (n=57) with semi-structured interviews (n=15), analyzed through reflexive thematic analysis within an activity theory framework. Led by BLV researchers, the project positions accessibility as central to research success rather than an afterthought, challenging performative inclusivity in current tool development. It proposes a reconceptualization of inclusive research practices centered on authentic BLV workflows and offers concrete design recommendations to advance the research ecosystem toward substantive, rather than symbolic, inclusion.

Technology Category

• Humans and AI: AI for Accessibility
• Computer Vision: Bias, Fairness & Privacy
• Application Domains: Humanities & Computational Social Science

Application Category

• Security and Privacy: Data transparency and provenance
• Economics, Online Markets and Human Computation: Research challenges in human and human-AI computation
• Responsible Web: Machine-in-the-loop, human agency and autonomy

Abstract

Research touts universal participation through accessibility initiatives, yet blind and low-vision (BLV) researchers face systematic exclusion as visual representations dominate modern research workflows. To materialize inclusive processes, we, as BLV researchers, examined how our peers combat inaccessible infrastructures. Through an explanatory sequential mixed-methods approach, we conducted a cross-sectional, observational survey (n=57) and follow-up semi-structured interviews (n=15), analyzing open-ended data using reflexive thematic analysis and framing findings through activity theory to highlight research's systemic shortcomings. We expose how BLV researchers sacrifice autonomy and shoulder physical burdens, with nearly one-fifth unable to independently perform literature review or evaluate visual outputs, delegating tasks to sighted colleagues or relying on AI-driven retrieval to circumvent fatigue. Researchers also voiced frustration with specialized tools, citing developers'performative responses and losing deserved professional accolades. We seek follow-through on research's promises through design recommendations that reconceptualize accessibility as fundamental to successful research and supporting BLV scholars'workflows.

Problem

• blind researchers
• low-vision researchers
• research accessibility
• inclusive research workflows
• systemic exclusion

Innovation

• blind and low-vision researchers
• inclusive research workflows
• accessibility as fundamental
• activity theory
• mixed-methods study