Introduction

Persons with disabilities are the largest minority group; it is estimated that around 650 million people worldwide live with a disability (Disabled World, 2020). Eighty seven million Europeans have some form of disability, and this means that one in four European adults has a certain type of disability (Council of the European Union and the European Council, 2022).

With the growing importance of smart assistive technologies for everyday life, ensuring equal access to information and services is an important area of concern both for persons with disabilities and for society as a whole (Vincente & Lopez, 2010). Assistive technology can be defined as “any product whose primary purpose is to maintain or improve an individual’s functioning and independence, and, thereby, promote their wellbeing” (Khasnabis, Mirza & MacLachlan, 2015). For persons with disabilities, assistive technologies can greatly enhance their functioning, independence, social inclusion, and participation in education and the labour marker. According to in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD), equal access to assistive technologies is a human right (UN General Assembly, 2006).

Previous studies have also confirmed that smart assistive technologies can increase independence in activities and participation for persons with different disabilities. For example, AI robotics, robotic arms that can be attached to wheelchairs, adaptive sports and recreation equipment, devices that assist standing and transfers, smart monitoring and coaching technology, power add-on devices for manual wheelchairs, and power mobility devices that operate in extreme terrain are just a few examples of technologies that have great potential to increase the independence for person who have mobility impairments (Dicianno et al., 2019). In addition, prototypes of AR systems can locate products in a store for persons with motor disabilities (Rashid, Melià-Seguí, Pous & Peig, 2016). AR systems can also be used as a navigating tool for persons with intellectual disabilities (McMahon, Cihak & Wright, 2015). The use of smart assistive technologies, such as memo planner, can help structure the daily lives of persons with intellectual disabilities, and afford them opportunities to participate in everyday activities (Söderström, Østby, Bakken & Ellingsen, 2021).

For persons with visual impairments, modern assistive technologies are becoming more discrete and include a wide range of mobile computerized devices, such as mobile phones. Smart assistive technologies designed for users with visual impairments can be used to determine their location, their relation to the surroundings, generate navigation instructions, and deliver all this information to them (Fernandes, Costa, Filipe, Paredes & Barroso, 2019).

Smart assistive technologies can be also useful for persons with hearing impairment. According to Kumar, Renuka, Rose & Wartana (2022), Visual Speech Recognition systems have played a vital role in speech recognition systems in recent years, because they do not require an acoustic environment. A Visual Speech Recognition system is an automatic process of detecting spoken words by tracking the speaker's lip movement. This technology provides persons who have hearing impairments with an alternative way of communication, i.e. visual communication.

Despite the fast progress of innovation and proven benefit of smart assistive technologies, previous research has revealed that compared to the general population, persons with disabilities tend to use digital technologies and the internet less frequently. In most world countries, people with disabilities face a significant digital divide (Scalan, 2022; Duplaga, 2017). Therefore, it is important to take a look at the existing barriers that hinder persons with different types of disabilities from having equal access to using these technologies.

Previous studies revealed that digital devices were often inaccessible to persons with different types of disabilities (Raja, 2016; Kane, Jayant, Wobbrock & Ladner, 2009). Inaccessibility may be due to obstacles in hardware, software, or both (Dobransky & Hargittai, 2016). Even relatives or caregivers can hinder access, as they often make the choices, particularly for youngsters with disabilities, denying them the opportunity to access a computer or the internet (Gutierrez & Martorell, 2011; Chiner, Gmez-Puerta & Cardona-Molt, 2017). This can have knock-on effects on other domains. As an example, a recent study from Sweden revealed that persons with disabilities were still unlikely to use the internet for purposes like internet banking or online shopping (Johansson, Gulliksen & Gustavsson, 2020).

Another issue is related to the fact that assistive technologies for persons with disabilities are often developed by populations who have no disability. This produces an environment in which the perspectives of researchers with disabilities, particularly when they clash with the normative ways of approaching accessible technology, are denigrated, dismissed, or treated as invalid (Ymous et al., 2020). However, there is a growing number of cases in which persons with disabilities are actively involved in the development process, namely co-designing. Co-designing is a promising way to engage users with disabilities to become active participants in the open innovation, given that they are experts in their own access needs (Alčiauskaitė, Vasconcelos & Andersen, 2021).

One more frequently reported barrier is related to the lack of funding and cost of assistive technologies, lack of awareness about the possibilities provided by digital technologies, and inadequate assessment (Boot, Owuor, Dinsmore & MacLachlan, 2018).

Despite previous research exploring the barriers and benefits of assistive technologies for improving the independence of persons with different types of disabilities (Bryant, Brunner & Hemsley, 2020; Gebresselassie, M., & Sanchez, 2018), there is still a lack of knowledge about their intention to use these technologies (Harris, 2010). Such research is challenged to study why some persons with disabilities are more likely to make use of technology than others, and it is important to investigate the motivational conditions for technology so as to assess behavioural intentions (Chen & Chan, 2011).

Hence, in this study we aimed to answer to these two research questions:

Are persons with different types of disabilities willing to use digital assistive technologies?
What types of digital assistive technologies would they find applicable to their disabilities and access needs?