USER ACCEPTANCE OF SMART BLIND STICK WITH REAL - TIME

MONITORING: AN ASSESSMENT OF THE UTAUT MODEL

An Undergraduate Research
Presented to the
COLLEGE OF TECHNOLOGY AND ENGINEERING
CEBU TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY
Argao Campus
Argao Cebu

In Partial fulfillment
Of the Requirements for the Degree
BACHELOR OF INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY
Major in Computer Technology

Vincent V. Suan
Ian Dale A. Rojas
Ralph Louise Q. Sabado
Jona Mae S. Gallendo
Flora Mae Labrador

May 2025
 ii

APPROVAL SHEET

This thesis titled, “USER ACCEPTANCE OF SMART BLIND STICK WITH REAL
TIME MONITORING: AN ASSESSMENT OF THE UTAUT MODEL”, prepared
and submitted by VINCENT V. SUAN, IANDALE A. ROJAS, RALPH LOUISE Q.
SABADO, FLORA MAE LABRADOR, JONA MAE S. GALLENDO in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of BACHELOR OF INDUSTRIAL
TECHNOLOGY MAJOR IN COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY has been examined and
recommended for acceptance and approval for Oral Defense.

RESEARCH PROJECT ADVISORY COMMITTEE

FRITZ D. BACALSO, PCpE, MPA, MSME

Adviser

IRVIN PAUL A. RENDON, MSIT CATHERINE P. ODIONG

Member Member

MANUEL ARRANGUEZ JR. PCpE CLIFFORD JHON B. ORQUIA, MSIT

Member Member

Approved by the Committee on Oral Defense with a grade of PASSED.

PANEL OF EXAMINERS FOR DEFEND

FRITZ D. BACALSO, PCpE, MPA, MSME

Adviser

IRVIN PAUL A. RENDON, MSIT CATHERINE P. ODIONG

Member Member

MANUEL ARRANGUEZ JR. PCpE CLIFFORD JHON B. ORQUIA, MSIT

Member Member
ACCEPTED and APPROVED in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree
of BACHELOR IN INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY MAJOR IN COMPUTER
TECHNOLOGY.
Date of Proposal Hearing: December 11, 2024
Date of Oral Defense: May 28, 2025

HELMER M. BAÑADOS, Ph.D.

DEAN, College of Technology
 iii

ABSTRACT

USER ACCEPTANCE OF SMART BLIND STICK WITH REAL-TIME

MONITORING: AN APPLICATION OF THE UTAUT MODEL

Suan, V. et.al.,
[email protected]
Cebu Technological University – Argao Campus

Irvin Paul A. Rendon

[email protected]
Cebu Technological University – Argao Campus

The research project focuses on developing a smart blind stick to enhance the

mobility and safety of visually impaired individuals. The user-centered design aims to

improve the quality of life for visually impaired individuals, offering greater

independence and confidence in their daily activities through enhanced navigation, safety,

and environmental awareness. Key findings indicate the smart stick's effectiveness in

detecting obstacles, providing accurate real-time monitoring and location tracking, and

feedback mechanism, along with efficient battery use. However, further optimization is

recommended to enhance the device's durability, sensory features, and power usage.

Future research may explore additional enhancements and integration with other smart

technologies to create a comprehensive support system for visually impaired users. By

focusing on user needs, environmental awareness, navigation assistance, and safety

features, the project aims to develop an effective assistive device that meets the specific

needs of visually impaired individuals, leading to greater independence and confidence in

their daily lives.

Keywords: Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time Monitoring, Performance Expectancy,

Effort Expectancy, Social Influence, Facilitating Conditions, Behavioral Intention.
 iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The researchers would like to heart-fully thank those who contributed to the

completion of this research.

First and foremost, the researchers would like to thank the Cebu Technological

University – Argao Campus for giving them the learning opportunity that helps the

researchers to develop valuable life lessons and the endless pursuit of knowledge.

The researchers wanted to show their gratefulness to the campus director,

Eingilbert C. Benolirao, Dev.Ed.D. for guiding the students to be professional and

innovative.

To Helmer M. Bañados, Ph.D. Dean of the College of Technology Engineering,

thank you for granting them permission to conduct the study outside the school grounds.

The researchers would like to convey their deep and sincere gratitude towards our

research adviser, Engr. Manuel Arranguez Jr. PCpE for providing invaluable guidance

that helped in the completion and success of this study.

The researchers would like to express their appreciation to the panelist, Engr.

Fritz D. Bacalso, PCpE, MPA, MSME, Engr. Manuel D. Arranguez Jr. PCpE, Engr.

Irvin Paul A. Rendon, MSIT, Clifford John B. Orquia, MSIT, Catherine P. Odiong,

and Arlyn S. Razonable LPT Also, for giving them essential ideas to polish our entire

research proposal to be ready for publication.

And to the Almighty God, for the guidance, strength, power of mind, and skills

and for giving them a healthy life to undertake this research study. To God be the Glory!

RESEARCHERS
 v

DEDICATION

We dedicate this research to our families, whose unwavering love and support

have been our greatest source of strength. Their encouragement has inspired us

throughout this journey, and we are deeply grateful.

Our heartfelt appreciation goes to the Almighty, whose guidance has provided us

with wisdom and resilience.

We extend sincere gratitude to our mentors and professors for their invaluable

guidance, shaping both our academic and professional growth.

Special thanks to our fellow team member, Vincent, Iandale, Ralph, Flora, and

Jona whose dedication and collaboration made this research possible.

Finally, we dedicate this work to those affected by its subject. May our findings

contribute to knowledge, innovation, and meaningful progress.

RESEARCHERS
 vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Preliminary Page
TITLE PAGE........................................................................................................................i
APPROVAL SHEET...........................................................................................................ii
ABSTRACT....................................................................................................................... iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT.................................................................................................. iv
DEDICATION.....................................................................................................................v
TABLE OF CONTENTS....................................................................................................vi
LIST OF TABLES............................................................................................................viii
LIST OF FIGURES............................................................................................................ ix
Chapter 1
THE PROBLEM AND ITS RESEARCH DESIGN
INTRODUCTION
Rationale of the Study......................................................................1
Theoretical Background...................................................................5
PROBLEM
Statement of the Problem.................................................................9
Hypothesis......................................................................................10
Significance of the Study............................................................... 11
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Flow of the Study...........................................................................13
Environment...................................................................................15
Respondents................................................................................... 17
Data Gathering Procedure..............................................................17
Gathering of Data...........................................................................18
Statistical Treatment...................................................................... 19
Scoring Procedures........................................................................ 21
DEFINITION OF TERMS................................................................................................ 22
Chapter 2
PRESENTATION, DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
Profile of the Respondents............................................................. 27
 vii

Age & Gender................................................................................ 28

Civil Status.....................................................................................30
Occupation..................................................................................... 31
Years of Visual Impairment...........................................................33
Functionality.................................................................................. 34
Usability.........................................................................................36
Performance Expectancy............................................................... 38
Effort Expectancy.......................................................................... 40
Social Influence............................................................................. 43
Facilitating Conditions...................................................................44
Behavioral Intention.......................................................................46
Chapter 3
SUMMARY, FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary........................................................................................ 54
Findings..........................................................................................56
Conclusion..................................................................................... 60
Recommendations..........................................................................61
Chapter4
Output of the Study........................................................................63
Scheme Implementation.................................................................63

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Books/Journal............................................................................................ 96
Online Sources........................................................................................... 97

APPENDICES
Transmital Letter........................................................................................99
Survey Questionnaire...............................................................................100
CURRICULUM VITAE................................................................................................108
 viii

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE DESCRIPTION PAGE

1 Distribution of Respondents.......................................................... 17

2 Scoring Procedure for functionality, Usability and UTAUT

Construct........................................................................................ 21

3 Respondent’s Age & Gender......................................................... 28

4 Respondent’s Civil Status.............................................................. 30

5 Respondent’s Occupation.............................................................. 31

6 Respondent’s Years of Visual Impairment.................................... 33

7 Respondent’s Perception of Functionality..................................... 35

8 Respondent’s Perception of Usability............................................37

9 Respondent’s Perception of Performance Expectancy.................. 39

10 Respondent’s Perception of Effort Expectancy............................. 41

11 Respondent’s Perception of Social Influence................................ 43

12 Respondent’s Perception of Facilitating Condition....................... 45

13 Respondent’s Perception of Behavioral Intention........................ 47

14 Significance of the UTAUT on predicting the intention to

use the Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time Monitoring................. 50

15 Components of Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time

Monitoring..................................................................................... 64

16 Gantt Chart During Proposal Stage................................................93

17 Gantt Chart During Building Stage................................................94

 ix

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE DESCRIPTION PAGE

1 Extended UTAUT Model................................................................ 8

2 Flow of the Study...........................................................................14

3 Research Environment................................................................... 16

4 System Architecture.......................................................................69

5 Circuit Diagram............................................................................. 70

6 Project Design................................................................................71

7 Orthographic View.........................................................................72

8 Actual Prototype............................................................................ 73

9 System Flowchart...........................................................................75
 CHAPTER 1

THE PROBLEM AN ITS SCOPE

INTRODUCTION

Rationale of the Study

According to Loganathan et al. (2020), our human body is dependent on five

senses that are sight, hearing, taste, smell, and touch. Out of these, one sense organ is our

eyes and without eyes, it is tough to live in life. Visually impaired individuals encounter

numerous challenges that impact their ability to navigate their environment and maintain

independence. Despite advancements in technology and legislation aimed at promoting

inclusivity, many visually impaired individuals continue to face barriers that hinder their

ability to navigate physical spaces, and perform daily activities independently. Imagine a

visually impaired person who takes daily walks in her suburban neighborhood. Despite

their familiarity with the area, they encounter numerous challenges that prevent their

independence. Tree roots often disrupt the pavement, overgrown hedges, and water -

canal on the sidewalk, making navigation tricky. This is the time when a device like blind

stick can be use as an aid to navigate and detects obstacles.

Vision impairment means that a person’s eyesight cannot be corrected to a

“normal” level. Vision impairment may be caused by a loss of visual acuity, where the

eye does not see objects as clearly as usual. It may also be caused by a loss of visual field,

where the eye cannot see as wide an area as usual without moving the eyes or turning the

head. (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2004, October 29).
 2

Vision impairment occurs when an eye condition affects the visual system and its

vision functions. Vision impairment has serious consequences for the individual across

the life course. Many of these consequences can be mitigated by timely access to quality

eye care. Eye conditions that can cause vision impairment and blindness - such as

cataract or refractive error, for good reasons, the main focus of eye care strategies;

nevertheless, the importance of eye conditions that do not typically cause vision

impairment - such as dry eye or conjunctivitis - must not be overlooked. These conditions

are frequently among the leading reasons for presentation to eye care services. (World

Health Organization. 2023, August 10).

The total population of the world is 7.7 billion and according to the World Health

Organization (WHO) survey, approximately 285 million people around the world are

visually impaired, among which 39 million are completely blind and 246 million with

low vision. Out of this group, 224 million can be cured. A blind person is always at risk

of encountering collisions and accidents. It is expected that by the year 2040, blindness

will increase three times. Until now, many proposed solutions and technologies have

been part of this problem (Loganathan et al., 2020).

Because visual impairment poses significant challenges to detecting obstacles and

navigation, especially without the presence of others, developing a smart blind stick

would be highly beneficial. This device could provide essential support, enhancing the

independence and safety of visually impaired individuals.

 3

A smart blind stick is an assistive device that helps visually impaired individuals

navigate their surroundings more safely and independently, to help them avoid collisions

and accidents. These features aim to offer greater independence and confidence compared

to traditional walking canes.

This study offers an effective solution to the challenges faced by visually

impaired individuals in navigating their environment and maintaining independence. By

incorporating advanced sensors, such as ultrasonic and infrared, the stick can detect

obstacles. These sensors provide real-time feedback to the user through spoken message

alerts to guide users, enabling them to avoid accidents and navigate safely. In addition to

obstacle detection, the smart blind stick can be equipped with GPS and GSM modules for

real-time location tracking, ensuring that users can confidently explore their surroundings.

The models may also include a camera for real-time monitoring, further enhancing the

family’s awareness of their environment.

Research addresses the numerous challenges faced by visually impaired

individuals in navigating their environment and maintaining independence. Despite

advancements in technology and legislation, these individuals continue to encounter

barriers that hinder their daily activities. The smart blind stick aims to enhance the

independence and safety of visually impaired individuals, offering greater autonomy and

reducing their reliance on others. This innovative solution addresses specific navigational

challenges, promoting a higher quality of life for those with vision impairment.
 4

The assessment conducted across the selected municipalities focused on assessing

the experiences of visually impaired individuals in their daily lives, particularly regarding

accessibility, mobility, and security. A total of 50 respondents participated, with 25 from

Carcar, 14 from Sibonga, 2 from Argao, and 9 from Dalaguete, ensuring full engagement

across all locations.

The findings revealed distinct challenges in each municipality, with Carcar

struggling with infrastructure limitations such as the absence of tactile paving and audible

pedestrian signals, making navigation difficult. In Sibonga, respondents raised concerns

about inconsistent accessibility in public areas, particularly in marketplaces and

government offices where physical barriers hinder movement. In Argao, respondents

highlighted the lack of accessible transportation options, noting that public transit

systems rarely accommodate visually impaired individuals, making independent mobility

challenging. Meanwhile, Dalaguete participants reported significant mobility challenges,

particularly due to uneven sidewalks and potholes, making independent navigation unsafe.

Across all municipalities, the overarching concerns centered around improving

accessibility, enhancing government-supported initiatives, and integrating assistive

technology solutions to create a more inclusive environment for visually impaired

individuals.
 5

Theoretical Background

This study is anchored on "User Acceptance of Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time

Monitoring: An Assessment of the UTAUT Model" employs the Unified Theory of

Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) by Venkatesh et al. (2003) to explore the

determinants of user acceptance of the smart blind stick among visually impaired

individuals. By applying the UTAUT model, the research aims to understand how various

factors influence the adoption and usage of this innovative assistive technology.

The UTAUT aims to explain user intentions to use an information system and

subsequent usage behavior. The theory holds that there are four key constructs: 1)

Performance Expectancy, refers to the belief that the device will enhance navigation and

safety for visually impaired individuals. This factor examines users' perceptions of the

smart blind stick's effectiveness in improving their mobility, detecting obstacles, real-

time monitoring, location tracking, and providing real-time feedback to avoid potential

hazards. 2) Effort Expectancy, on the other hand, pertains to the perceived ease of using

the smart blind stick. This factor assesses how user-friendly and intuitive the device is,

considering the technical and physical capabilities of visually impaired individuals. 3)

Social Influence, examines the extent to which individuals believe that their peers, family

members, or society in general think they should use the smart blind stick. This factor

highlights the importance of societal and community support in promoting the acceptance

of assistive technologies, and 4) Facilitating Conditions, refers to the availability of

resources and support required to use the smart blind stick effectively.
 6

According to Bermudo et al. (2020), ultrasonic sensors are widely used for

obstacle detection in assistive devices, providing both distance measurement and surface

density analysis to enhance navigation for visually impaired individuals. Similarly,

Martinez et al. (2020) examined the usability of ultrasonic sensor-based blind sticks

integrated with GPS tracking, highlighting their effectiveness in improving mobility and

independence. The Smart Blind Stick using IoT (Saravanan et al., 2023) further discusses

the integration of ultrasonic sensors with GSM and GPS modules, allowing real-time

location tracking and obstacle detection. These studies reinforce the relevance of

ultrasonic sensors in assistive technology, demonstrating their accuracy in distance and

angle estimations while minimizing environmental interference. By aligning with the

performance expectancy component of the UTAUT model, these advancements

contribute to the adoption and acceptance of smart blind sticks among visually impaired

users. A water sensor is designed to detect the presence of water when the smart stick is

dipped into it. By utilizing the water sensor, contact with water triggers a closed circuit,

providing the desired output. This mechanism ensures real-time detection, alerting users

to wet surfaces and potential hazards. Recent studies, such as Smart Water Leak

Detection Systems for Assistive Devices (Chen et al., 2021) and IoT-Based Water

Sensing for Mobility Assistance (Patel et al., 2023), explore the integration of water

sensors in assistive technologies, improving accessibility and safety for visually impaired

individuals.

According to Techatronic (2021), ultrasonic sensors are widely used for obstacle

detection in assistive devices but can be affected by multiple reflections, leading to

inaccuracies in certain environments. Similarly, the Smart Blind Stick Project (2023)
 7

highlights that while ultrasonic sensors provide reliable detection, they require careful

calibration to minimize errors caused by ambient interference. The study also compares

infrared (IR) sensors, noting that IR sensors consume less power and offer a cost-

effective alternative to ultrasonic and laser sensors. The GitHub-based Smart Blind Stick

Project (2025) emphasizes the importance of lightweight and foldable designs,

integrating voice alerts and multi-level proximity detection to enhance user experience.

By focusing on affordability, efficiency, and accessibility, these advancements contribute

to the development of smart blind sticks that improve mobility and independence for

visually impaired individuals.

Kunta et al. (2020) had a rather interesting approach to the smart stick for the

visually impaired. They implemented the smart stick by combining the other common

methods in the literature and added an additional functionality of the GPS and GSM

modules for sending a message to the caretaker of the user on their mobile phone by

getting coordinates from the GPS module and sending them through the GSM module.

Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time Monitoring through the application of the UTAUT

model. The addition of GPS and GSM functionalities directly addresses the performance

expectancy component of the UTAUT model, emphasizing the enhanced safety and

convenience the device offers. The real-time monitoring feature aligns with the effort

expectancy aspect, as it provides an easy-to-use solution for users, their

parents/guardians and caretakers.

 8

Functionality
Usability
Performance
Expectancy

Effort
Expectancy
Smart Blind Stick
Behavioral
with Real-TIme
Intention
Social Monitoring
Influence

Facilitating
Conditions

Age & Gender

Civil Status
Occupation
Years of Visual Impairment

Figure 1
Extended UTAUT Model
 9

PROBLEM

Statement of the Problem

The purpose of this study is to asses the user acceptance of smart blind stick with

real-time monitoring, Using the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology

(UTAUT) of the visually impaired individual in the selected municipalities of Cebu for

the Academic Year 2024 – 2025 as basis for developing a prototype.

Specifically, the study will answer the following questions:

1. What is the demographic profile of the respondents in terms of their:

1.1 Age & Gender

1.2 Civil Status

1.3 Occupation

1.4 Years of Visual Impairment?

2. What is the perception of the respondents towards the acceptability of smart blind

stick with real-time monitoring in terms of:

2.1 Functionality; and

2.2 Usability

3. What is the perception of the respondents towards the UTAUT construct on the

acceptance of the smart blind stick with real-time monitoring as to:

3.1 Performance Expectancy;

3.2 Effort Expectancy;

3.3 Facilitating Conditions;

3.4 Social Influence;

 10

3.5 Behavioral Intentions;

4. Is there significant relationship among the aforementioned constructs in using

smart blind stick with real-time monitoring?

5. Based on the findings, what prototype can be developed?

Statement of Null Hypothesis

Ho. There is no significant relationship among the aforementioned constructs in the use

of the smart blind stick with real time monitoring.

By rejecting this null hypothesis, researchers can infer that there is no significant

relationship among the aforementioned constructs in the use of the smart blind stick with

real-time monitoring. This suggests that factors such as performance expectancy, effort

expectancy, social influence, and facilitating conditions may not meaningfully impact the

acceptance and usage of the device among visually impaired individuals. It underscores

the need to explore alternative influences, such as personal adaptability, environmental

factors, or policy-driven initiatives, in shaping user adoption behavior. Conversely,

accepting the null hypothesis could imply that any observed associations between these

constructs and the acceptance of the smart blind stick with real-time monitoring are

merely coincidental and not indicative of a casual relationship.

 11

Significance of the Study

The findings of this study will greatly contribute to identify the perception of the

effectiveness of smart blind stick with real time monitoring in the selected municipalities

of Cebu.

The beneficiaries of this smart blind stick with real time monitoring are the following:

Visually Impaired Individuals. This advanced device offers significant benefits by

enhancing their mobility and safety through real-time obstacle detection and feedback. It

allows users to navigate their environments with greater confidence and independence,

reducing their reliance on others for assistance. The device's intuitive design and

functionality improve their quality of life by enabling them to perform daily activities

more efficiently and safely.

Caregivers and Family Members. The device provides peace of mind as they can trust

that their loved ones have a reliable tool to assist them in navigating their surroundings

safely. This reduces the caregiving burden and stress, allowing family members to feel

more secure about the well-being of the visually impaired individuals in their care. The

technology helps create a supportive environment where independence is encouraged.

Healthcare Providers. Recommending this advanced assistive device can improve the

overall mobility and independence of their patients. Additionally, the insights gained

from user acceptance studies can inform healthcare providers about patient preferences

and needs, enabling them to offer more personalized and effective care solutions.
 12

Technology Developers and Manufacturers. This knowledge allows them to design

more user-centered and effective assistive devices. By creating products that align with

user needs and preferences, developers can achieve higher adoption rates and customer

satisfaction, driving innovation and market success in the field of assistive technology.

Policymakers and Social Workers. The insights into technology acceptance can help

develop policies and programs that promote the widespread adoption of assistive

technologies like the Smart Blind Stick. By creating more inclusive and supportive

environments, policymakers and social workers can enhance the quality of life for

visually impaired individuals and ensure they have access to necessary resources.

Society. Enhanced social inclusion allows visually impaired individuals to participate

more actively in social, educational, and economic activities. This fosters a more

inclusive and diverse community, where everyone has the opportunity to contribute and

thrive, ultimately benefiting the economy and societal well-being.

Future Researchers. The application of the UTAUT model in this context offers a

theoretical framework that can be used in future studies to explore similar technologies.

Moreover, the insights gained can guide researchers in identifying new areas of

improvement and innovation within the field of assistive technology, paving the way for

the development of more advanced and user-friendly devices for visually impaired

individuals.
 13

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This study employs a quantitative research design to assess the user acceptance of

the Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time Monitoring. The quantitative method is chosen to

objectively measure the constructs of Performance Expectancy, Effort Expectancy, Social

Influence, and Facilitating Conditions. The participants of this study are visually

impaired individuals residing in the selected municipalities of Cebu. The questionnaire

will include both demographic questions and Likert-scale items to assess the participants

perceptions and acceptance of the Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time Monitoring.

Flow of the Study

The flow in this research was presented in figure 2, which the inputs are the data

gathered using survey questionnaires. The survey questionnaires are made to be able to

acquire the needed result for the respondent’s personal data which are the Age and

Gender, Civil Status, Occupation and Years of Visual Impairment. Next is the analysis of

respondent perceptions regarding the acceptability of the smart blind stick with real-time

monitoring, focusing on functionality and usability. Additionally, the study examines

respondent perspectives on performance expectancy, effort expectancy, facilitating

conditions, social influence, and behavioral intentions in relation to adopting the assistive

device. The gathered data undergoes interpretation and calculation, ensuring meaningful

insights are extracted from the survey responses. This process ultimately contributes to

the development of a prototype based on the findings, aligning with the UTAUT model to

enhance mobility and accessibility for visually impaired individuals.

 14

INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT

1. Respondents Profile:

1.1 Age & Gender

1.2 Civil Status

1.3 Occupation

1.4 Years of Visual

Impairment
1. Survey questionnaire
2. Perception of the making through data
Respondents towards the collection
acceptability of smart
blind stick with real-time
monitoring in terms of:
2. Gathering the
Prototype of the
2.1 Functionality; and respondents data
UTAUT smart
2.2 Usability blind stick with
real- time
3. Perception of the 3. Data interpretations monitoring
respondents on the use of and calculations
the smart blind stick with
real time monitoring as
to:

3.1 Performance
Expectancy;

3.2 Effort Expectancy;

3.3 Facilitating
Conditions;

3.4 Social Influence

3.5 Behavioral
Intentions;

Figure 2
Flow of the Study
 15

Environment

The selected municipalities of Cebu, is purely a combination of rural areas and

sub-urban areas, where smart blind sticks may be ill-equipped with these advanced

technologies mostly to the far areas. The locals are of middle income to lower middle-

income brackets that will straight lead to affordability hindrances to assistive devices for

the visually impaired persons. However, much has been done by the municipality in

terms of infrastructure; yet, the access to digital technologies and the high-tech devices

may not necessarily be an all-encompassing introduction with regards to using smart

blind sticks. Social ties within the selected municipalities of Cebu, like family support

groups and pool communities, are quite active in the adoption of new technologies,

especially in rural settings.

Government programs that support persons with disabilities in the selected

municipalities of Cebu could facilitate the use of assistive technologies right through

financial aid or distribution programs. School institutions and local centers in the selected

municipalities of Cebu play considerable roles in making people know of the emerging

kind of technology, which in turn increases ease of usage through workshops. The elder

generation in the selected municipalities of Cebu may be relatively much more resistant

to the adoption of high-tech devices than the younger technocratic generation, which

would be much more willing to adopt smart blind sticks. In fact, those areas in the

selected municipalities of Cebu that can be classified as rural have issues with internet

connection coverage; thus, due to this ineffectiveness, real-time monitoring features

through smart blind stick devices would not be at their full potential.
 16

Figure 3
Research Environment
 17

Respondents

The distinguished respondents of this study are 50 random residents of the selected

municipalities of Cebu. In this research, the researchers use a data collection method

which contains the survey questionnaire.

Respondent Sample Percentage

Visually Impaired 50 100
Individuals

Table 1
Distribution of Respondents

Data Gathering Procedure

Questionnaires will be used in this proposal that was adapted from the Unified

Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology.

These tools can be used to collect information and evaluate user adoption and acceptance

of a smart blind stick with real-time monitoring based on the UTAUT paradigm, offering

insightful information for system developers and operation to enhance the technology and

user experience.

Part I is about the related information on each respondent covering their

demographic profile such as age, gender, civil status, occupation and years of visual

impairment.

Part II is the perception of the respondents towards the acceptability of smart

blind stick with real-time monitoring in terms of functionality and usability.

 18

Part III is the perception of the respondents towards the UTAUT construct on the

acceptance of the smart blind stick with real-time monitoring as to performance

expectancy, facilitating conditions, social influence, behavioral intentions.

Gathering Data

Before conducting the study, the researcher obtained consent from barangay

officials through a permission letter to survey residents in the selected municipalities of

Cebu .

The development of UTAUT smart blind stick for real-time monitoring and assistance

for visually impaired individuals has gained significant traction. One of the most

promising innovations in this domain is the smart blind stick, which integrates various

sensors and communication technologies to enhance mobility and safety for users. The

UTAUT smart blind stick typically employs ultrasonic sensors for obstacle detection,

GPS for location tracking, and various feedback mechanisms to alert users about their

surroundings. This multifaceted approach not only aids in navigation but also empowers

users with greater independence and confidence in their mobility. The integration of

ultrasonic sensors in smart blind sticks is a common feature that facilitates obstacle

recognition. These sensors emit sound waves that bounce off objects, allowing the stick

to detect obstacles in the user's path. The importance of ultrasonic sensors in their design

of a UTAUT smart blind stick, which also incorporates GPS technology for real-time

location tracking. This capability is particularly crucial for visually impaired individuals,

who may face increased risks in unfamiliar environments.

 19

Statistical Treatment

Statistical techniques are applied to the data that are being gathered in this research.

To be able to analyze and evaluate the outcome, the data are coded, calculated and

tabulated. The following statistical techniques are used.

Frequency and Percentage

This method of classification not only helps in organizing the respondent's

demographic information but also aids in identifying patterns and trends within the data.

By calculating the percentage of respondents for each item, researchers can accurately

assess the distribution and significance of various demographic factors, enabling a more

comprehensive analysis of the survey results and their implications.

1. Frequency

The frequency of each response will be determined by the tally of respondents

indicating a particular choice within this item. This process involves counting the number

of participants who select each option, allowing researchers to gauge the prevalence of

various responses and discern any notable trends or patterns within the dataset.

2. Percentage

This method is employed to assess the distribution profile of respondents

concerning the identified factors delineated in the questionnaire. By scrutinizing these

factors, researchers gain insights into the demographic composition and preferences of

the participants, enabling a comprehensive analysis of the collected data.

P-f/N x 100%

Where f= frequency

N= population
 20

Mean. To determine the mean of the given data, the researchers must add all the values

in each item and the divide the result by the number of items in the data set.

Standard Deviation. To measure the amount of variation of a set of values. To get the

standard deviation you need to follow and solve the problem using this formula.

= sample mean

= sum of the responses of the respondent

= the total average of the responses of the respondents

Regression. Is a statistical process for estimating the relationships among variables. It

includes many techniques for modeling and analyzing several variables, with a primary

focus on the relationship between a dependent variable and one or more independent

variables. This method allows for the prediction of the dependent variable based on the

values of the independent variables, providing insights into the strength and type of

relationships present.

= dependent variable
= function

= independent variable

= unknown parameters

= error terms
 21

Scoring Procedures

The scoring procedures used in determining the usefulness of the UTAUT model of

Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time Monitoring.

A. Functionality, Usability and Respondent’s perception towards the UTAUT

factors of Smart Blind Stick with Real - Time Monitoring

SCALE RANGE DESCRIPTION

5 4.21 - 5.00 Strongly Agree

4 3.41 - 4.20 Agree

3 2.61 - 3.40 Neither Agree nor Disagree

2 1.81 - 2.60 Disagree

1 1.00 - 1.80 Strongly Disagree

Table 2
Scoring procedure for Functionality, Usability and UTAUT Construct
 22

Definition of Terms

Accessibility - Refers to the design of products, devices, services, or environments for

people with disabilities. In this study, accessibility pertains to the ease with which

visually impaired individuals can navigate environments and utilize the smart blind stick

with real-time monitoring.

Age - Is defined as the length of time that an individual has lived or existed. In this study,

age refers to the specific years of an individual that may influence their willingness and

ability to use the smart blind stick.

Arduino Uno - Is a microcontroller board based on the ATmega328P, widely used for

electronic prototyping and embedded systems. In this study, Arduino Uno serves as the

main processing unit for the smart blind stick, enabling sensor integration and system

functionality.

Assistive Technology - Includes devices or systems designed to improve the functional

capabilities of individuals with disabilities. In this study, assistive technology refers to the

smart blind stick equipped with sensors, GPS, and real-time monitoring features to

enhance mobility for visually impaired users.

Blindness - Is the condition of lacking visual perception due to physiological or

neurological factors. In this study, blindness refers to the total or partial loss of vision

experienced by the respondents who rely on assistive mobility tools.

 23

Caregiver - Is an individual who provides care and assistance to a person with

disabilities, chronic illnesses, or aging-related challenges. In this study, caregivers refer

to individuals who support visually impaired users by guiding them and ensuring the

proper use of the smart blind stick.

Civil Status - Refers to the legal classification of an individual's personal relationships,

such as being single, married, widowed, or divorced. In this study, civil status is

considered a demographic factor in analyzing potential differences in the acceptance and

usage of the smart blind stick among respondents.

Effort Expectancy - Describes the degree of ease associated with the use of a system,

based on the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) model. In

this study, effort expectancy refers to the perceived difficulty or ease of using the smart

blind stick based on user feedback.

Facilitating Conditions - Are external factors that make the adoption of a technology

easier, such as available resources and support systems. In this study, facilitating

conditions refer to infrastructure, policies, and training programs that support the

effective use of the smart blind stick.

Feedback System - Is a mechanism that collects, processes, and responds to user inputs

for improvement. In this study, the feedback system refers to the real-time notifications

and response mechanisms within the smart blind stick that help users navigate their

surroundings safely.
 24

Functionality - Refers to the ability of a system or device to operate effectively and

fulfill its intended purpose. In this study, functionality pertains to the efficiency and

responsiveness of the smart blind stick in detecting obstacles and providing navigation

support.

Gender - Is the socially constructed characteristics of women, men, and non-binary

individuals, including roles, behaviors, and identities. In this study, gender is considered

as a variable in analyzing different perceptions and acceptance rates of the smart blind

stick among respondents.

GPS Tracking - Is the process of using Global Positioning System (GPS) technology to

monitor the location of an object or individual in real-time. In this study, GPS tracking

enables visually impaired users to access location-based assistance, ensuring safety and

mobility while using the smart blind stick.

Mobility - Is the ability to move freely and easily from one place to another, particularly

in relation to physical movement. In this study, mobility pertains to the capability of

visually impaired individuals to navigate their surroundings using the smart blind stick.

Mobility Aid - Is a device designed to assist individuals with disabilities or movement

impairments in walking and navigation. In this study, the smart blind stick serves as a

mobility aid for visually impaired users by providing real-time obstacle detection and

assistance.
 25

Obstacle Detection - Is the process of identifying and avoiding physical barriers using

sensors and imaging technologies. In this study, obstacle detection refers to the ultrasonic

and infrared sensors integrated into the smart blind stick to help visually impaired users

avoid collisions.

Occupation - Refers to an individual's professional or employment status that influences

socioeconomic conditions. In this study, occupation is analyzed as a factor that may

affect the adoption and usability of the smart blind stick among respondents.

Performance Expectancy - Refers to the degree to which a user believes a system will

enhance their performance, as defined by the UTAUT model (Venkatesh et al., 2003).

Operational Definition: In this study, performance expectancy is the extent to which

visually impaired users perceive the smart blind stick as improving their ability to move

safely and independently.

Real-Time Monitoring - Is the continuous tracking and recording of data in a live

environment. In this study, real-time monitoring refers to the smart blind stick’s ability to

provide instant alerts and location tracking to support the user’s navigation and safety.

Sensor Accuracy - Refers to the precision with which a device can measure and detect

changes in environmental conditions. In this study, sensor accuracy measures the

effectiveness of the smart blind stick’s sensors in detecting obstacles and providing

reliable feedback.
 26

Smart Blind Stick - Is an assistive device equipped with sensors and technology to help

visually impaired individuals navigate their surroundings. In this study, the smart blind

stick incorporates ultrasonic sensors, GPS tracking, and real-time monitoring to provide

mobility assistance to users.

Standard Deviation - Is a statistical measure that quantifies the amount of variation or

dispersion in a dataset. In this study, standard deviation is used to analyze the distribution

of responses regarding the acceptance and usability of the smart blind stick.

Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) - The UTAUT model

explains user acceptance of technology through key constructs such as performance

expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, and facilitating conditions. In this study,

the UTAUT model is used to assess the factors influencing the adoption and usability of

the smart blind stick among visually impaired individuals.

 CHAPTER 2

PRESENTATION, DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

This chapter presents, analyzes, and interprets the data collected in the study. It

aims to address all the research questions outlined in the statement of the problem. The

chapter is organized into four sections. The first section discusses the demographic

profile of the respondents.

The second section examines the functionality, safety, capability, and security

aspects of the system by applying the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of

Technology (UTAUT) framework, specifically focusing on the acceptability of the Smart

Blind Stick with Real – Time Monitoring , in relation to the safety and security of the

blind person.

The third section explores the respondents' perceptions of the intelligent carrier

system using UTAUT indicators, including performance expectancy, effort expectancy,

social influence, facilitating conditions, attitude, and behavioral intentions.

Finally, the fourth section presents the significance of these constructs in

predicting the respondents’ intention to use the User Acceptance of Smart Blind Stick

with Real-Time Monitoring.

PROFILE OF THE RESPONDENTS

This section presents the demographic profile of the respondents in terms of age,

gender, civil status, occupation, highest educational attainment and years of visual
 28

impairment . Providing names was optional. The participants, both male and

female, were randomly selected from in the municipality of Cebu.

Age and Gender

The age and gender of the respondents reports that the age is categorized in 5

factors while the gender is only 2. The presentation shows that the respondents raging 18

to 25 years old has the highest frequency with 19 or 39,00%, 15 of them are male and 4

are female.

GENDER

AGE MALE FEMALE TOTAL

F % F % F %

18 – 25 15 55.6 4 17.4 19 39.00

years old

26 – 35 3 11.1 6 26.1 9 18.00

years old

36 – 45 2 7.40 3 13.0 5 10.00

years old

46 – 55 6 22.2 8 34.8 14 28.0

years old

56 - 60 1 3.70 2 8.70 3 6.00

years old
and above

TOTAL 27 100 23 100 50 100

Table 3
Respondents Age and Gender
 29

Table 3 presents the distribution of respondents by age and gender out of a total of

50 participants. The data reveal that there are more male respondents than female

respondents overall. The largest age group among the respondents is 18 to 25 years old,

with a frequency of 19, representing 39.00% of the total. Within this group, 15 are male

and 4 are female. The second largest group falls within the 46 to 55 age range,

comprising 14 respondents or 28.00%, with 6 males and 8 females. This is followed by

the 26 to 35 age group, with a frequency of 9 or 18.00%, consisting of 3 males and 6

females. The 36 to 45 age group accounts for 5 respondents or 10.00%, with 2 males and

3 females. Lastly, the smallest group is those aged 56 to 60 and above, with only 3

respondent or 6.00%, consisting of 1 male and 2 females respondents were recorded in

this age bracket. These findings highlight that the majority of Smart Blind Stick with

Real-Time Monitoring users are younger adults, predominantly male, suggesting that

younger generations may be more inclined to adopt automated farming technologies.

Recent technological advancements in assistive technology have highlighted the

importance of user demographics in adopting innovative mobility aids like the Smart

Blind Stick with Real-Time Monitoring. Age plays a significant role in adoption, as

younger individuals with visual impairments often embrace technology-driven solutions,

while older users may exhibit reluctance due to familiarity with traditional canes (Garcia

et al., 2022). Gender also influences accessibility and acceptance, as mobility patterns

and concerns regarding assistive devices can differ between men and women (Singh &

Patel, 2023).

Data analysis typically reveals trends in user interaction and satisfaction,

showcasing demographic responses. For instance, Rahman et al. (2022) found that
 30

younger users valued the enhanced independence and safety features of smart blind sticks,

while older individuals preferred conventional mobility aids due to ease of use and

familiarity. Considering age and gender in the design process ensures that assistive

technologies are inclusive and effective, fostering broader accessibility for individuals

with visual impairments.

Civil Status

This section presents the distribution of respondents according to their civil status,

categorized as single or married.

Civil Status Frequency Percentage

Single 43 86.0

Married 7 14.0

Total 50 100.0

Table 4
Respondent’s Civil Status

Table 4 shows the distribution of respondents based on civil status in relation to

the User Acceptance of the Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time Monitoring. Out of 50

respondents, the majority were single, accounting for 43 individuals or 86.00% of the

total. Married respondents comprised 7 individuals or 14.00%.

This data suggests that single individuals may be more inclined to adopt assistive

technologies like the User Acceptance of Smart Blind Stick, potentially due to a stronger

emphasis on personal independence and adaptability to technological solutions. Married

individuals, while still significantly represented, may consider such innovations with
 31

regard to household responsibilities, shared financial planning, and practical

considerations for daily routines.

Understanding these civil status distinctions helps developers and implements of

assistive technologies tailor their approach to accommodate varying user needs. Studies

have shown that civil status can significantly affect technology adoption in healthcare and

assistive tools. According to Tan and Lim (2020), single individuals often demonstrate

greater autonomy and a proactive stance in exploring assistive solutions. In contrast,

married users may adopt technologies collaboratively within the family context, as

suggested by Kumar and Singh (2020). Recognizing these differences supports the

inclusive and successful adoption of systems like the User Acceptance of Smart Blind

Stick with Real-Time Monitoring across a diverse user base.

Occupation

This section outlines the respondents' current occupation, categorized as

unemployed or Physical Therapist (P.T) . These occupational classifications help in

understanding the varying levels of user acceptance of the Smart Blind Stick with Real-

Time Monitoring.

Occupation Frequency Percentage

Unemployed 34 68.0

Physical Therapist (P.T) 16 32.0

Total 50 100

Table 5
Respondent’s Occupation
 32

Table 5 shows the distribution of respondents’ occupations in relation to the User

Acceptance of the Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time Monitoring. Out of 50 respondents,

34 individuals or 68.00% are unemployed, while 16 individuals or 32.00% are engaged in

Physical Therapist (P.T.) work.

This distribution suggests that the majority of potential users are unemployed,

which may indicate a higher dependence on assistive technologies for daily mobility,

especially in the absence of formal employment. The substantial representation of part-

time workers highlights a group that may benefit from enhanced mobility to support

flexible or irregular work schedules. While unemployed individuals may face financial or

accessibility barriers to adopting the device, they may also place a high value on tools

that support independence and autonomy. On the other hand, Physical Therapist might

prioritize portability, ease of use, and reliability, as these features can directly impact

their ability to work efficiently.

Studies have shown that employment status affects both the motivation and ability

to adopt assistive technologies. According to Lee and Fernandez (2020), unemployed

individuals are often more receptive to supportive devices when affordability and ease of

use are addressed, while part-time workers may seek technologies that improve

productivity and self-sufficiency. Recognizing these distinctions is critical for ensuring

that the Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time Monitoring is inclusive, adaptable, and

supportive of users with varying employment conditions.

 33

Years of Visual Impairment

This section presents the respondents' years of visual impairment of being blind,

categorized as 1–3 years, 4–6 years, 7–10 years and above.

Years of Visual Impairment Frequency Percentage

1-3 years 7 14.0

4-6 years 25 50.0

7-10 years and above 18 36.0

Total 50 100

Table 6
Respondent’s Years of Visual Impairment

Table 6 shows the distribution of respondents based on their years of visual

impairment of being blind in relation to the User Acceptance of the Smart Blind Stick

with Real-Time Monitoring. Out of 50 respondents, the largest group 25 individuals or

50.00%—have been blind for 4 to 6 years. This is followed by 18 individuals or 36.00%

who have been blind for 7 to 10 years and above, and the smallest group 7 individuals or

14.00% have been blind for 1 to years.

This distribution suggests that a significant portion of users have long-term

experience living with blindness, which may influence their criteria for adopting new

assistive technologies. Individuals blind for many years may have already developed

coping strategies or familiarity with traditional tools, potentially leading to more critical

evaluation of new devices. Conversely, those with fewer years of visual impairment may
 34

be more open to adopting innovative technologies as they seek ways to adapt and regain

independence.

Research indicates that the duration of disability can significantly impact the

adoption of assistive technologies. According to Santos and Rivera (2019), individuals

who have been recently affected are more likely to explore and adopt smart tools as part

of their adjustment process, while long-term users may prioritize features that offer clear

advantages over their established routines. Understanding these dynamics is essential for

ensuring that the Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time Monitoring meets the expectations

and needs of both new and experienced users, supporting wide-scale acceptance and

sustained use.

FEATURES OF THE SMART BLIND STICK WITH REAL TIME

MONITORING

The Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time Monitoring is an advanced assistive device

designed to enhance mobility and safety for individuals with visual impairments.

Equipped with sensor-based navigation, obstacle detection, and real-time monitoring

capabilities, this technology aims to provide users with greater independence and

confidence in their daily movements.

Functionality

The functionality of the Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time Monitoring is essential

for supporting the mobility and safety of visually impaired users. A well-functioning

device ensures accurate obstacle detection, effective real-time location tracking, and
 35

responsive feedback through audio alerts. These core features allow users to navigate

their environment with greater confidence and independence.

Functionality Mean SD Verbal Description

The smart blind stick provides accurate 4.30 0.614 Strongly Agree
real-time monitoring of the user's
surroundings and obstacles.

The real-time notifications or alerts 4.40 0.638 Strongly Agree

from the smart blind stick are clear and
easy to understand.

The smart blind stick's functionality 4.42 0.672 Strongly Agree

improves the user's ability to navigate
independently.

The device's sensors function reliably 4.48 0.579 Strongly Agree

under various conditions.

The smart blind stick's real-time 4.50 0.580 Strongly Agree

monitoring system integrates
seamlessly with other assistive
technologies or mobile apps.

Average 4.42 0.617 Strongly Agree

Table 7
Respondents’ Perception of Usability

Table 7 presents the accuracy of functionality factors for the Smart Blind Stick

with Real-Time Monitoring. The results show that the first function—providing accurate

real-time monitoring of the user's surroundings and obstacles—earned a rating of 4.30,

categorized as “Strongly Agree”. The second function, delivering clear and easy-to-

understand real-time notifications or alerts, received a “Strongly Agree” score of 4.40.

 36

The third function—enhancing the user's ability to navigate independently—garnered a

4.42, also rated “Strongly Agree”.

The fourth function, which is the reliable performance of the device’s sensors

under various conditions, was rated 4.48, while the fifth function—seamless integration

of the monitoring system with other assistive technologies or mobile applications—

received a score of 4.50. Both are also interpreted as Strongly Agree.

According to Leeflang and Kraaijpoel (2021), the accuracy of a diagnostic or

functional system is measured by its ability to consistently perform under expected

conditions and provide reliable outputs. In assistive technology, this accuracy supports

user confidence, independence, and safety. The high ratings across all five items confirm

that the Smart Blind Stick is functionally reliable and well-suited for integration into the

daily lives of visually impaired users, meeting core expectations for modern assistive

mobility tools.

Usability

This section presents the respondents’ assessment of the usability of the Smart

Blind Stick with Real-Time Monitoring, focusing on key aspects that contribute to its

practical and user-friendly design. These include the device’s safety features,

effectiveness in obstacle detection, durability, adaptability to different environments, and

the reliability of its real-time alerts. These elements are essential in determining how

easily and confidently users—particularly individuals with visual impairments—can

integrate the device into their daily routines. High usability in these areas reflects the
 37

stick’s ability to meet user needs with minimal effort, supporting independent navigation

and overall user satisfaction.

Mean SD Verbal
Usability Description

The smart blind stick is easy to use and 4.34 0.592 Strongly Agree
operate without extensive training.

The design and ergonomics of the smart 4.38 0.602 Strongly Agree
blind stick make it comfortable to
handle for extended periods.

The real-time monitoring features are 4.24 0.591 Strongly Agree

intuitive and accessible for users with
varying levels of technical skills.

The setup and configuration of the smart 4.26 0.750 Strongly Agree
blind stick are straightforward and user-
friendly.

The smart blind stick's interface is clear 4.36 0.721 Strongly Agree
and easy to navigate.

Average 4.32 0.652 Strongly Agree

Table 8
Respondents Perception of Usability

The data presented in Table 8 indicates a strong positive perception of the Smart

Blind Stick's usability, with an overall mean rating of 4.32 (SD = 0.652), categorized as

Strongly Agree. This suggests that the device is generally well-received in terms of being

user-friendly and accessible.

Among the items, the highest-rated was the comfort and ergonomic design of the

device (M = 4.38), highlighting the importance of physical handling for users who rely
 38

on it for extended periods. The clarity of the interface (M = 4.36) and ease of use without

extensive training (M = 4.34) were also highly rated, emphasizing that the device meets

essential criteria for assistive technologies.

Furthermore, the intuitiveness of the real-time monitoring features (M = 4.24) and

the simplicity of setup and configuration (M = 4.26) suggest that users with varying

levels of technical expertise can effectively operate the system. These findings are critical,

as usability is a major factor influencing the acceptance and long-term use of assistive

devices (Alqahtani & Doush, 2021).

Additionally, the Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time Monitoring demonstrates

high usability among respondents, supporting its potential for wide adoption among

visually impaired users seeking a reliable, easy-to-use mobility aid.

PERCEPTION OF THE RESPONDENT TOWARD UTUAT CONSTRUCT

The unified theory of acceptance and utilization of technology indicator aims to

explain the technology acceptance of Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time Monitoring. In

addition to behavioral intention and use of behavior, the UTUAT model consist of four (4)

construct namely in performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence,

facilitating conditions.

Performance Expectancy

This section summarizes the respondents’ evaluation of the performance

expectancy of the Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time Monitoring, which includes its

perceived ability to improve mobility, support navigation in challenging environments,

 39

ease daily activities, enhance obstacle detection, and boost user confidence when moving

outdoors. Performance expectancy reflects the degree to which users believe that using

the device will help them achieve gains in their daily functioning and independence.

Mean SD Verbal
Performance Expectancy Description

I believe the Smart Blind Stick will 4.44 0.611 Strongly Agree
improve my mobility and
independence.

The device will allow me to navigate 4.44 0.540 Strongly Agree

challenging environments safely.

Using the Smart Blind Stick will make 4.42 0.609 Strongly Agree
my daily activities easier to perform.

The Smart Blind Stick will enhance 4.22 0.678 Strongly Agree
my ability to detect obstacles.

With the Smart Blind Stick, I will feel 4.44 0.732 Strongly Agree
more confident when walking
outdoors.

Average 4.39 0.635 Strongly Agree

Table 9
Respondent’s perception of Performance Expectancy

Based on the data in Table 9, respondents demonstrated strong confidence in the

performance of the Smart Blind Stick, with an overall average rating of 4.39 (SD =

0.635), categorized as Strongly Agree. This suggests a highly positive perception of the

device's potential to enhance mobility and support greater independence in daily life.
 40

The highest-rated items were improving mobility and independence (M = 4.44,

SD = 0.611), safe navigation in challenging environments (M = 4.44, SD = 0.540), and

increasing user confidence when walking outdoors (M = 4.44, SD = 0.732). These results

show that users expect the device to significantly reduce mobility-related limitations and

promote confidence in outdoor navigation.

The statement regarding the device’s ability to make daily tasks easier also

received a high score (M = 4.42), indicating that users see the Smart Blind Stick as a

practical tool for day-to-day living. The relatively lower, yet still strong, rating of 4.22 for

enhancing obstacle detection suggests an area where performance could be further

optimized or clarified to users.

These findings affirm the Smart Blind Stick’s alignment with the expectations of

its target users, reinforcing its perceived value as a reliable and empowering assistive

device. High performance expectancy plays a crucial role in influencing adoption, as

users are more likely to accept and consistently use technologies they believe will

improve their quality of life (Venkatesh et al., 2020).

Effort Expectancy

Effort expectancy refers to the degree of ease associated with using a particular

technology. In the case of the Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time Monitoring, effort

expectancy plays a crucial role in user adoption, particularly for individuals with visual

impairments who rely on intuitive and accessible assistive devices. A key factor

influencing effort expectancy is the user-friendly interface and seamless integration of

 41

smart functionalities, such as sensor-based obstacle detection, GPS tracking, and voice-

assisted navigation.

Effort Expectancy Mean SD Verbal Description

I believe the Smart Blind Stick will 4.40 0.571 Strongly Agree
improve my mobility and
independence.

The device will allow me to navigate 4.38 0.567 Strongly Agree

challenging environments safely.

Using the Smart Blind Stick will make 4.48 0.543 Strongly Agree
my daily activities easier to perform.

The Smart Blind Stick will enhance my 4.40 0.534 Strongly Agree
ability to detect obstacles.

With the Smart Blind Stick, I will feel 4.58 0.537 Strongly Agree
more confident when walking outdoors.

Average 4.45 0.551 Strongly Agree

Table 10
Respondent’s Perception of Effort Expectancy

As presented in Table 10, respondents gave consistently high ratings to the effort

expectancy factors of the Smart Blind Stick, with an overall mean score of 4.45 (SD =

0.551), categorized as Strongly Agree. These results suggest that users perceive the

device as easy to learn and operate, which is a crucial factor in encouraging adoption

among visually impaired individuals.

 42

The highest-rated item was users' confidence when walking outdoors (M = 4.58),

showing that the device significantly reduces uncertainty and supports independent

movement. Similarly, users strongly agreed that the Smart Blind Stick helps make daily

activities easier to perform (M = 4.48), highlighting the perceived convenience and

practical benefits of the device.

Other highly rated items include improving mobility and independence (M =

4.40), safe navigation in complex environments (M = 4.38), and enhanced obstacle

detection (M = 4.40), all pointing to the Smart Blind Stick’s user-friendly design and

operational simplicity.

These findings emphasize that the Smart Blind Stick is not only functionally

capable but also accessible and manageable for users without requiring extensive training

or technical knowledge. According to the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of

Technology (UTAUT), a high level of effort expectancy is a strong predictor of

technology adoption—particularly in assistive technologies where ease of use can

directly affect confidence and user independence (Venkatesh et al., 2020).

In conclusion, the strong ratings across all items reinforce the idea that the Smart

Blind Stick with Real-Time Monitoring is a well-designed, low-effort solution that meets

the mobility needs of its target users while encouraging greater autonomy and user

satisfaction.
 43

Social Influence

This section presents the respondents’ perceptions of social influence regarding

the use of the Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time Monitoring. It reflects how support from

family, peers, and caregivers affects their decision to adopt the device. Positive

encouragement and approval from others play a key role in increasing user confidence

and acceptance of assistive technologies.

Social Influence Mean SD Verbal

Description

My family members encourage me to 4.48 0.543 Strongly Agree

use the Smart Blind Stick regularly.

Healthcare professionals recommend 4.14 0.606 Agree

the use of assistive devices like the
Smart Blind Stick.

I feel supported by my community in 4.50 0.580 Strongly Agree

using the Smart Blind Stick.

I feel motivated to use the Smart Blind 4.38 0.567 Strongly Agree
Stick because others recommend it.

Using the Smart Blind Stick is 4.36 0.662 Strongly Agree

considered socially acceptable in my
community.

Average 4.37 0.592 Strongly Agree

Table 11
Respondent’s Perception of Social Influence
 44

As shown in Table 11, respondents gave consistently high ratings to the social

influence factors related to the Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time Monitoring, with an

overall mean score of 4.37 (SD = 0.592), falling under the Strongly Agree category. This

indicates that the opinions and encouragement of others significantly impact the users'

willingness to adopt the device.

The highest-rated item was community support (M = 4.50, SD = 0.580),

suggesting that acceptance and encouragement from peers and local groups play a key

role in boosting user confidence. Family encouragement (M = 4.48) and

recommendations from healthcare professionals (M = 4.14) also contribute positively,

reinforcing the perceived value and reliability of the device.

Users also agreed that social approval (M = 4.36) and recommendations from

others (M = 4.38) motivate them to use the device regularly. These findings affirm that

social support is a vital factor in the successful adoption of assistive technologies among

visually impaired individuals (Nierling & Maia, 2020).

In line with the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT),

these results show that positive influence from social networks can drive user

engagement, increase trust in the technology, and promote long-term use of the Smart

Blind Stick.

Facilitating Conditions

This section presents the respondents’ perceptions of facilitating conditions

regarding the use of the Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time Monitoring. Facilitating
 45

conditions refer to the availability of resources, support, and infrastructure that enable

effective use of the device. This includes access to technical assistance, training,

maintenance, and compatible technologies, all of which contribute to seamless integration

into users' daily lives.

Facilitating Conditions Mean SD Verbal

Description

I have access to adequate resources to 4.44 0.577 Strongly Agree

learn how to use the smart blind stick
effectively."

There is sufficient technical support 4.44 0.577 Strongly Agree

available to assist me with using the
smart blind stick."

I have easy access to maintenance or 4.34 0.592 Strongly Agree

repair services for the smart blind stick if
it malfunctions.

The necessary technological 4.18 0.690 Agree

infrastructure available to fully utilize
the real-time monitoring features of the
smart blind stick.

Setting up the smart blind stick and 4.32 0.586 Strongly Agree
connecting it to its monitoring system is
easy and requires minimal assistance.

Average 4.34 0.605 Strongly Agree

Table 12
Respondent’s Perception of Facilitating Conditions
 46

As shown in Table 12, respondents gave consistently high ratings to the

facilitating conditions related to the Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time Monitoring, with

an overall mean score of 4.34 (SD = 0.605), falling under the Strongly Agree category.

This indicates that users feel well-supported in terms of the resources and infrastructure

needed to operate the device effectively.

The highest-rated items were access to learning resources and availability of

technical support (both M = 4.44, SD = 0.577), reflecting strong confidence in the

support systems available to help users understand and operate the device. Respondents

also agreed that maintenance and repair services (M = 4.34) are accessible, which is

crucial for ensuring continuous, worry-free use of the device.

In addition, the availability of technological infrastructure to support real-time

monitoring features (M = 4.18) and the ease of setup and connection (M = 4.32) were

rated positively, emphasizing that the device is designed for straightforward integration

into users’ daily lives (Nierling & Maia, 20202).

These findings suggest that the Smart Blind Stick is supported by the necessary

conditions for successful and sustained use. In line with the Unified Theory of

Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT), facilitating conditions are essential in

determining whether users feel capable of using a technology efficiently, especially

among visually impaired individuals who may rely heavily on external support systems.

Behavioral Intention

This section presents the respondents’ perceptions of behavioral intention in using

the Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time Monitoring. In the context of assistive technology,
 47

behavioral intention refers to a user’s motivation and commitment to adopt and continue

using a device over time. It is a key predictor of actual usage and is influenced by

perceived usefulness, ease of use, social influence, and supporting conditions.

Understanding behavioral intention is critical in evaluating whether a product like the

Smart Blind Stick is likely to achieve long-term acceptance and integration into the daily

lives of visually impaired individuals.

Behavioral Intention Mean SD Verbal

Description

I intend to use the Smart Blind Stick 4.24 0.624 Strongly Agree
frequently in the future.

I would recommend the Smart Blind 4.48 0.579 Strongly Agree

Stick to other visually impaired
individuals.

I am likely to purchase the Smart Blind 4.34 0.626 Strongly Agree

Stick if it becomes available..

I would prioritize the Smart Blind 4.28 0.701 Strongly Agree

Stick over other assistive devices for
navigation.

I am confident in my ability to use the 4.42 0.641 Strongly Agree

Smart Blind Stick effectively and
independently.

Average 4.35 0.635 Strongly Agree

Table 13
Respondent’s Perception of Behavioral Intention
 48

As presented in Table 13, the respondents gave consistently high ratings to

behavioral intention indicators, with an overall mean score of 4.35 and a standard

deviation of 0.635, interpreted as Strongly Agree. These results reflect a positive outlook

among users toward the continued and frequent use of the Smart Blind Stick.

The highest-rated item was the intention to recommend the device to other

visually impaired individuals (M = 4.48, SD = 0.579). This suggests that users not only

value the functionality of the device for themselves but also recognize its potential to

benefit others within their community. Such peer-to-peer endorsement is a powerful form

of advocacy and reinforces social acceptance of the technology.

Another strong indicator was the confidence in using the device independently (M

= 4.42, SD = 0.641). This shows that the Smart Blind Stick instills a sense of

empowerment among its users, encouraging autonomy and enhancing mobility. Similarly,

a willingness to purchase the device (M = 4.34, SD = 0.626) indicates a strong intention

to invest in the technology, reflecting its perceived value and utility in real-world

situations.

Respondents also expressed a preference for the Smart Blind Stick over other

assistive devices for navigation (M = 4.28, SD = 0.701), suggesting that the device meets

critical user needs more effectively than existing alternatives. The intention to use the

device frequently in the future (M = 4.24, SD = 0.624) further supports the expectation of

sustained usage, which is essential for the long-term success and impact of any assistive

technology (World Health Organization, 2022).

 49

These findings are consistent with the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of

Technology (UTAUT), which identifies behavioral intention as a primary determinant of

actual system usage. When users demonstrate a strong intention to use a product—driven

by positive experiences, reliable performance, and supportive conditions—it significantly

increases the likelihood of widespread adoption.

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE AFOREMENTIONED CONSTRUCT IN PREDICTING

THE ADOPTING OF THE SMART BLIND STICK WITH REAL-TIME

MONITORING

The Model Summary provides a comprehensive overview of the statistical

analysis used to evaluate the relationships between key variables in the study. This

section presents the key indicators, including R-squared values, regression coefficients,

and significance levels, which help assess the predictive power and reliability of the

research model. By analyzing these metrics, the study determines the extent to which

factors such as performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, and

facilitating conditions contribute to the user acceptance of the Smart Blind Stick with

Real-Time Monitoring. The findings in this section play a crucial role in validating the

theoretical framework and ensuring the robustness of the research conclusions.

 50

Model Summary

Adjusted R Std. Error of

Model R R Square Square the Estimate

1 .432a .186 -.049 .32736

a. Predictors: (Constant), FCAver, Cs, SIAver, Gender, Occup, PEAver, EEAver,

YrsOfExp, UsaAver, Age, FuncAver

Unstandardized Standardized
Coefficients Coefficients
Model t Sig.
B Std. Error Beta

1 (Constant) .917 1.480 .619 .539

Age .024 .044 .105 .546 .588

Gender .036 .103 .057 .352 .727

Cs -.003 .148 -.003 -.018 .986

Occup .030 .112 .044 .268 .790

YrsOfExp -.006 .083 -.013 -.071 .944

FuncAver -.023 .210 -.023 -.112 .911

UsaAver .371 .265 .245 1.404 .169

PEAver .026 .162 .026 .162 .872

EEAver .283 .192 .246 1.471 .149

SIAver .149 .199 .142 .746 .460

FCAver -.056 .182 -.053 -.308 .760

a. Dependent Variable: BIAver

Table 14
Significance of the UTAUT on predicting the intention to use the Smart
Blind Stick with Real-Time Monitoring
 51

These are the estimated coefficients for each predictor variable in the model. They

represent the change in the dependent variable (BiAver) associated with a one-unit change

in the predictor variable, holding other variables constant.

The coefficient for FuncAver is -0.023, indicating that for every one-unit increase

in FuncAver, the dependent variable BiAver is expected to decrease by 0.023 units.

However, this effect is not statistically significant (p = 0.911), suggesting that FuncAver

may not have a substantial impact on BiAver in this model.

Similarly, the coefficients for other predictor variables—such as FCAver, SIAver,

and PEAver—reflect their respective influences on BiAver. Among these, UsaAver

demonstrates a positive coefficient of 0.371, implying a stronger positive relationship

with BiAver. However, like FuncAver, UsaAver does not reach statistical significance at

the 0.05 level (p = 0.169), indicating that while the relationship is positive, it lacks the

statistical strength required for conclusive interpretation.

These findings suggest that while some predictor variables exhibit directional

influence, their statistical significance remains limited, warranting further exploration

through alternative modeling approaches, increased sample sizes, or refined variable

selection. Understanding these nuances is essential for improving the predictive capacity

of the model and ensuring robust insights into the factors influencing BiAver.

The model examines the influence of various factors on BIAver, the dependent

variable representing Behavioral Intention to Adopt the Smart Blind Stick with Real-

Time Monitoring. The coefficients provide insights into how different predictors

contribute to user adoption and acceptance.The constant (B = 0.917, p = 0.539) indicates

 52

that even in the absence of other influencing factors, there is a baseline level of intention

to adopt the device.

Age (B = 0.024, p = 0.588) and Gender (B = 0.036, p = 0.727) show weak

positive relationships with adoption intention, suggesting that demographic factors may

not be strong predictors in this context.

Usability Average (UsaAver, B = 0.371, p = 0.169) has the highest positive

coefficient, indicating that perceived usability has a notable impact on adoption, although

its significance level does not reach the 0.05 threshold.

Effort Expectancy Average (EEAver, B = 0.283, p = 0.149) and Social Influence

Average (SIAver, B = 0.149, p = 0.460) show moderate positive coefficients, implying

that ease of use and social recommendations may encourage adoption, but the

relationships lack strong statistical significance.

Functionality Average (FuncAver, B = -0.023, p = 0.911) and Facilitating

Conditions Average (FCAver, B = -0.056, p = 0.760) have negative coefficients,

indicating that functionality and external support may not be major drivers of behavioral

intention in this model.

Usability as a Key Factor: Users are more inclined to adopt the Smart Blind Stick if they

perceive it as highly usable and effective, reinforcing the need to optimize design for

intuitive navigation and minimal effort in operation.

Role of Effort Expectancy: Although not statistically significant, the positive

coefficient of EEAver suggests that the ease of learning and using the device remains an
 53

important consideration. Enhanced training programs and user support could further

strengthen adoption. While SIAver shows a positive trend, it lacks significance, implying

that peer recommendations alone may not be enough to drive adoption. Community

engagement and awareness campaigns could enhance social influence.

Despite being a feature-rich device, functionality alone does not strongly predict

adoption. Instead, the user experience—how effortlessly and confidently users interact

with the device—should remain the priority. The lack of strong statistical significance in

many variables suggests that additional studies with larger sample sizes, alternative

measurement approaches, or refined model specifications may be necessary to strengthen

findings. Improving accessibility, training, and awareness could enhance the adoption of

assistive technologies among visually impaired individuals.

 CHAPTER 3

SUMMARRY, FINDINGS, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter presents a summary of the key findings, derives conclusions from the

gathered data, and provides recommendations based on the examined empirical evidence

from the previous chapters.

SUMMARY

This research aims to assess the acceptance of the Smart Blind Stick with Real-

Time Monitoring using the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology

(UTAUT) to evaluate its adoption among visually impaired individuals. The study

examines key UTAUT constructs such as performance expectancy, effort expectancy,

social influence, facilitating conditions, attitude, and behavioral intention to determine

users’ likelihood of adopting the assistive device.

The research serves as a foundation for developing the Smart Blind Stick,

focusing on understanding respondents’ perceptions regarding usability, safety, security,

and sustainability within the UTAUT framework. By analyzing user feedback, this study

explores the interrelationships among these constructs and their role in influencing the

acceptance and utilization of assistive technologies for mobility enhancement.

In addition to assessing acceptance through UTAUT, this study delves into the

practical implementation of the Smart Blind Stick, highlighting the device’s functional

capabilities, environmental adaptability, and long-term viability as an aid for visually

impaired individuals. By investigating user perceptions and behavioral intention, the

 55

study aims to establish a comprehensive understanding of adoption dynamics that

will guide the effective development and optimization of assistive mobility solutions.

Through this in-depth evaluation, the study provides valuable insights into

enhancing the functionality and user experience of the Smart Blind Stick. These findings

support future innovation and policy recommendations, ensuring that assistive

technologies continue to evolve in a manner that prioritizes accessibility, safety, and ease

of use for visually impaired individuals.

The UTAUT constructs of the Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time Monitoring

were assessed through purposive sampling methodology. A sample of 50 respondents, In

the selected municipalities of Cebu, specifically residents of Carcar City, Sibonga, Argao,

and Dalaguete, participated in the study. A tailored questionnaire was employed to gather

the data.

FINDINGS

The conclusion presented are derived from the gathered data and the associated statistical

examination.

Profile of Respondents

Of the 50 total respondents, there are 27 males and 23 females that were given in

the survey questionnaire for the academic year 2024-2025.

 56

In terms of their occupation was to determine as; unemployed, physical therapist

(P.T). There are 34 or 68.0% of them are unemployed, 16 or 32.0% are physical therapist

(P.T).

In terms of Years of Visual Impairment it is determine that 50.0% with a

frequency of 25 is 4-6 years of visual impairment. 36.0% with a frequency of 18 is 7-10

years and above of visual impairment. 14.0% with a frequency of 7 is 1-3 years of visual

impairment with a total of 50 respondents.

Perception on accuracy under Functionality of Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time

Monitoring

It was shown that this survey the level of accuracy under the functionality of

Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time Monitoring as to provide monitoring to user’s

surroundings got an average mean of 4.30 with a verbal description of Strongly Agree.

The highest mean with 4.50 and verbal description of Strongly Agree, describe the

function of the real-time monitoring system integrates to technologies. On the second

function which is the device’s sensor under various conditions got a mean of 4.48 with a

verbal description of Strongly Agree. On the third function which is the improve the

user’s ability to navigate independently got a mean of 4.42 with a verbal description of

Strongly Agree. Lastly , in the function which is the notifications or alerts from the smart

blind stick got a mean of 4.40 with a verbal description Strongly Agree. Basically, in the

total functionality of Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time Monitoring gathered an average

mean of 4.42 which is Strongly Agree as a verbal description.

 57

Perception on accuracy under Usability of Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time

Monitoring

The survey results demonstrate a strong usability rating for the Smart Blind Stick

with Real-Time Monitoring. The overall average mean for usability-related functions is

4.32, with a verbal description of Strongly Agree, indicating high user satisfaction.

The highest-rated usability aspect, with a mean of 4.38, pertains to the design and

ergonomics, suggesting that users find the device comfortable to handle for extended

periods. The second highest aspect, with a mean of 4.36, highlights the clarity and ease of

navigation of the smart blind stick's interface. Additionally, the ease of use without

extensive training received a mean of 4.34, reinforcing its intuitive nature.

Other usability aspects include the setup and configuration, which scored 4.26,

confirming its user-friendly setup, and the real-time monitoring features, which received

4.24, indicating strong accessibility across users with different technical backgrounds.

Performance Expectancy

The Performance Expectancy of the Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time

Monitoring received consistently high ratings, with an overall mean of 4.39, categorized

as Strongly Agree. The highest-rated aspects, each with a mean of 4.44, highlight strong

user confidence in the device's ability to improve mobility and independence, ensure safe

navigation in challenging environments, and enhance confidence when walking outdoors.

The statement "Using the Smart Blind Stick will make my daily activities easier to

perform" received a mean score of 4.42, further reinforcing its practicality in everyday

use. Meanwhile, the ability to detect obstacles was rated slightly lower, with a mean of
 58

4.22, suggesting an area where performance could be optimized for even greater user

satisfaction.

Effort Expectancy

The Effort Expectancy of the Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time Monitoring

received an average mean of 4.45, classified as Strongly Agree, indicating users perceive

the device as intuitive and easy to use.

The highest-rated statement, "With the Smart Blind Stick, I will feel more

confident when walking outdoors," received a mean of 4.58, highlighting strong user

confidence in the device’s ability to enhance safety and independence. Similarly, "Using

the Smart Blind Stick will make my daily activities easier to perform" had a mean of 4.48,

reinforcing its practicality for everyday use.

Users also rated "The Smart Blind Stick will improve my mobility and

independence" and "The device will enhance my ability to detect obstacles" with a mean

of 4.40, suggesting strong expectations for its effectiveness in supporting mobility.

Meanwhile, "The device will allow me to navigate challenging environments safely"

received a slightly lower, but still strong, mean of 4.38, reflecting overall confidence in

its navigation features.

Social Influence

The Social Influence of the Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time Monitoring
received an average mean of 4.37, classified as Strongly Agree, indicating strong external
support for its adoption.
 59

The highest-rated statement, "I feel supported by my community in using the

Smart Blind Stick," received a mean of 4.50, highlighting the positive influence of social

acceptance. Similarly, "My family members encourage me to use the Smart Blind Stick

regularly" scored 4.48, reflecting strong encouragement from close relatives.

The statement "I feel motivated to use the Smart Blind Stick because others recommend

it" had a mean of 4.38, demonstrating the impact of peer recommendations in driving

user confidence. "Using the Smart Blind Stick is considered socially acceptable in my

community" received a mean of 4.36, reinforcing its acceptance in social settings.

Meanwhile, "Healthcare professionals recommend the use of assistive devices like the

Smart Blind Stick" had a slightly lower mean rating of 4.14, categorized as Agree,

suggesting a positive, though less pronounced, endorsement from medical professionals.

Facilitating Condition

The Facilitating Conditions for the Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time Monitoring

received an average mean of 4.34, categorized as Strongly Agree, suggesting that users

find the necessary support and infrastructure largely accessible for its effective use.

The highest-rated statements, each with a mean of 4.44, indicate that users have

access to adequate learning resources and sufficient technical support, reinforcing

confidence in ease of adoption. Additionally, easy access to maintenance or repair

services received a mean of 4.34, further supporting the device’s reliability.

Users also rated "Setting up the Smart Blind Stick and connecting it to its

monitoring system" with a mean of 4.32, demonstrating that its installation process is
 60

perceived as straightforward and requiring minimal assistance. While "The necessary

technological infrastructure available to fully utilize the real-time monitoring features"

received a slightly lower rating of 4.18, categorized as Agree, it suggests an area where

accessibility or connectivity could be further optimized to enhance user experience.

Behavioral Intention of User Acceptance of Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time

The Behavioral Intention regarding the Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time

Monitoring received an average mean of 4.35, classified as Strongly Agree, indicating a

high likelihood of adoption and recommendation among users.

The statement "I would recommend the Smart Blind Stick to other visually

impaired individuals" received the highest rating mean of 4.48, emphasizing strong user

confidence in the device’s benefits. Similarly, "I am confident in my ability to use the

Smart Blind Stick effectively and independently" was rated mean of 4.42, reinforcing

perceptions of ease of use.

Users also expressed a strong likelihood of purchasing the device mean of 4.34

and prioritizing it over other assistive technologies mean of 4.28, suggesting high

acceptance levels. The statement "I intend to use the Smart Blind Stick frequently in the

future" received M = 4.24, reflecting general commitment to long-term utilization.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this study underscore the strong acceptance and positive

perception of the Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time Monitoring among visually impaired

individuals. Through the application of the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of
 61

Technology (UTAUT), respondents exhibited high confidence in the device’s

functionality, ease of use, and social relevance. Performance expectancy, effort

expectancy, social influence, and facilitating conditions all received favorable ratings,

demonstrating the Smart Blind Stick’s potential to enhance mobility, independence, and

user confidence in navigating diverse environments.

Furthermore, the behavioral intention results suggest a sustained willingness

among users to adopt and recommend the device, reinforcing its practicality and long-

term viability as an assistive mobility tool. The strong support for usability, accessibility,

and technological infrastructure highlights the importance of continuous improvement to

ensure the device remains adaptable to users’ evolving needs.

Overall, this study provides valuable insights into the factors influencing user

acceptance of assistive technologies, emphasizing the Smart Blind Stick’s capability to

promote independence and safety for visually impaired individuals. By integrating user

feedback and addressing areas for optimization, future developments can refine the

device’s effectiveness, ensuring that it remains a reliable and accessible solution for

mobility enhancement.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the findings and conclusions of this study, the following

recommendations are:

Enhancing obstacle detection by incorporating LiDAR technology for precise depth

sensing and ultrasonic arrays for detecting small or moving objects. AI-powered image

recognition could help differentiate between obstacles like stairs, curbs, or moving
 62

pedestrians. Introducing directional vibration feedback, where different intensity levels

indicate distance from obstacles. Adding adaptive audio alerts, such as voice-based

warnings, will further improve user awareness in real-time. Develop haptic or audio-

based directional indicators to guide users in making left or right turns. A short vibration

pulse on the left handle can signal a left turn, while a pulse on the right handle indicates a

right turn. Additionally, voice-guided cues (e.g., "Turn left in 3 meters") can improve

navigation in outdoor environments. To improve long-term usability, implement solar-

powered charging modules, high-capacity lithium batteries, and power-saving modes to

reduce frequent recharging. Wireless charging compatibility could further enhance

convenience. Develop accessible training resources such as: Mobile app tutorials for real-

time guidance, Braille and voice-supported manuals for ease of onboarding, Simulation-

based training to allow users to practice navigation in a controlled environment, Offering

mobile support services for users with limited accessibility.

 CHAPTER 4

OUTPUT OF THE STUDY

This chapter presents key considerations patterned as a proposal for the prototype

of User Acceptance of Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time Monitoring: An Application of

the UTAUT Model.

Rationale

This proposal serves as the foundation for the development and refinement of the

assistive device, aiming to enhance independent mobility, safety, and user accessibility

for visually impaired individuals.

Objectives

The acceptance plan is designed for the attainment of the following:

1. To assist visually impaired individuals in navigating their environment safely

and independently.

2. To provide caregivers and family members with real-time monitoring

capabilities, ensuring enhanced safety and communication.

3. To improve accessibility through intuitive device functionality, allowing users to

detect obstacles, track locations, and receive alerts efficiently.

Scheme Implementation

The proposal for the adoption of the Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time

Monitoring is meticulously designed to address the accessibility challenges faced by

visually impaired individuals. The target date for the implementation of the proposed

system is set for the school year 2024-2025.

 64

This proposal outlines the adoption and implementation of a Smart Blind Stick

system, specifically designed to provide enhanced mobility and safety for visually

impaired individuals. By integrating real-time obstacle detection, GPS tracking, and

emergency alerts, the system ensures users can navigate their surroundings with

confidence and independence. The assistive device is equipped with ESP32, GSM,

ultrasonic sensors, soil moisture detection, and an audio feedback mechanism, ensuring

seamless interaction and real-time responsiveness.

Components of Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time Monitoring

Components Name Description Quantity Price

A rocker switch is
an electrical switch
where the actuator,
or "rocker," is
pivoted on a central
axis to switch 1 PHP 37.00
between two or
more positions.

Rocker Switch

A power bank is a
portable,
rechargeable battery
pack used to charge
electronic devices
like smartphones
and tablets without
needing an electrical 1 PHP 977.00
outlet.

Power Bank
 65

The ESP32 is a
versatile System-on-
a-Chip (SoC)
microcontroller
developed by
Espressif Systems,
designed for
wireless 1 PHP 186.00
communication and
IoT applications.

ESP32

An ultrasonic sensor
is a device that uses
high-frequency
sound waves,
outside the range of
human hearing, to
measure distance or
detect the presence 2 PHP 79.00
of objects.

Ultrasonic Sensor

A GPS module is a
small, all-in-one
digital receiver that
uses signals from
orbiting satellites to
determine its
location and provide
precise time 1 PHP 117.00
information.

GPS Module
 66

A GSM (Global
System for Mobile
Communication)
module is a small
electronic
component that
enables devices to
communicate over 1 PHP 136.00
the cellular network.

GSM Module

A Serial MP3 player

is a small electronic
module that allows
you to play MP3 and
WAV audio files
using a
microcontroller via
serial 1 PHP 165.00
communication.

Serial MP3 Player

A soil moisture
sensor is a device
that measures the
amount of water
present in the soil.

1 PHP 69.00

Soil Moisture
Sensor
 67

The ESP32-CAM is
a low-cost, compact
development board
that integrates an
ESP32
microcontroller with
a 2-megapixel
camera (OV2640)
and a microSD card
slot. 1 PHP 300.00

ESP32 Camera

An earpiece is a
small audio device,
often a type of
earphone or a
component of a
headset, that is worn
in or near the ear to
allow the user to 1 PHP 89.00
hear audio.

Earpiece

The Arduino Uno is

a popular, open-
source
microcontroller
1 PHP 246.00
board based on the
ATmega328P.

Arduino Uno
 68

The MPU6050 is a
6-axis motion
tracking device, a
type of Inertial
1 PHP 139.00
Measurement Unit
(IMU).

MPU6050

A piezo buzzer is an
electronic device
that uses
piezoelectricity to
1 PHP 49.00
produce sound.
Piezo Buzzer

Stranded wire is a
type of electrical
conductor made up
of multiple thin
5m PHP 165.00
wires twisted
together in a helix.

Stranded Wire

A blind stick, also

known as a cane, is
a mobility aid used
by people who are
1 PHP 470.00
blind or have low
vision to navigate
their environment.
Blind Stick

TOTAL PHP 3,224.00

Table 15
Components of Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time Monitoring
 69

User Rocker Switch - Turning Power Bank - supplies Soil Moisture Sensor -
a circuit on or off power to connected Detect wet or slippery
devices. surfaces

Ultrasonic 1 - Detect Ultrasonic 2 - Detect stairs,

objects directly in front slopes, or sudden drops ESP32 - Main controller
of the user for smart functions
Serial MP3 Player -
Provides voice
feedback to the user

GPS Module - provides

location and time
GSM Module - share GPS ESP32 Camera - capturing
information globally.
location, and establish real-time images to
remote communication analyze surroundings
Earpiece -
Ensures that voice
alerts and
navigation
instructions are
clearly heard

Internet - Provides
Mobile Phone - capable connectivity to the ESP32
of communication, Camera, enabling live
navigation, and internet streaming
access. Thief
Smart Blind Stick with
Real-Time Monitoring

Mpu6050 - Detects
Arduino Uno - Serves as
Piezo Buzzer - Provides abnormal movement when
the main control unit,
auditory alerts the smart blind stick is
forcefully grabbed.
Figure 4
System Architecture
 70

Figure 5
Circuit Diagram
 71

Rocker Switch

Turning a circuit on or
off
ESP32 Camera

Captures real-time video footage

of the user’s surroundings.
Ultrasonic Sensor 1

Detect objects directly in

front of the user

Soil Moisture Sensor

Ultrasonic Sensor 2
Detect wet or slippery surfaces
Detect stairs, slopes, or
sudden drops

Internal Components

ESP32 - Main controller GSM Module - Send data/SMS

for smart functions for emergency or location info

GPS Module - Track Serial MP3 Player - Provide

user location in real-time audio feedback to the user

Arduino Uno – Main

MPU6050 – Detects theft
controller handling
attempts, triggering security
motion detection and
responses.
alert activation.

Piezo Buzzer – Emits an alarm if

unauthorized movement or an
emergency situation is detected.

Figure 6
Project Design
 72

ISOMETRIC VIEW TOP VIEW

FRONT VIEW RIGHT SIDE VIEW BACK VIEW

Figure 7
Orthographic View
 73

Figure 8
Actual Prototype
 74

Operation Manual of Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time Monitoring

Manual Procedure

Rocker Switch

Turning a ESP32 Camera

circuit on or off
Captures real-time
Ultrasonic Sensor 1 video footage of
the user’s
Detect objects surroundings
directly in front of
the user Soil Moisture

Ultrasonic Sensor 2 Sensor

Detect stairs, slopes, Detect wet or

or sudden drops slippery surfaces

Product Parameters

Operation Steps:

Step 1: Press the switch to turn ON the device.

Step 2: The buzzer sounds for a few seconds to indicate startup success.

Step 3: If the Ultrasonic Sensor 1 detects nearby obstacles speaker or earpiece announces

“Obstacle detected.”

Step 4: If the Ultrasonic Sensor 2 detects slopes or elevation changes speaker or earpiece

announces “Downhill.”

Step 5: Soil Moisture Sensor detects water or wet surfaces speaker or earpiece announces

“Wet surface.”

Step 6: If the device is grabbed suddenly (possible theft or mishandling) buzzer activates

loudly as an alarm.

Step 7: GPS Module tracks real-time location, allowing emergency positioning.

Step 8: GSM Module sends SMS with real-time coordinates to caregivers or family

members.
 75

Figure 9
Extended System Flowchart
 76

PROGRAM CODE

#define BLYNK_TEMPLATE_ID "TMPL6ey93UW4q"

#define BLYNK_TEMPLATE_NAME "BLIND STICK"

#define BLYNK_AUTH_TOKEN "NyJ8Fmfz8A-9AUW9qv3U_9FwN37_eqqf"

#include <WiFi.h>

#include <WiFiClient.h>

#include <LiquidCrystal_I2C.h>

#include <BlynkSimpleEsp32.h>

#include <HardwareSerial.h>

#include <TinyGPSPlus.h> // Library for GPS parsing

// Define the pins for RX and TX on the ESP32

#define ESP32_RX 32 // RX pin (connect to TX of the MP3 module)

#define ESP32_TX 33 // TX pin (connect to RX of the MP3 module)

// Create a HardwareSerial object (use Serial1 or Serial2 for ESP32)

HardwareSerial mp3Serial(1); // Using Serial1 (you can also use Serial2 if needed)

// Use UART2 for GSM module

HardwareSerial GSM(2); // UART2

 77

// Define the pins for GSM and GPS communication

const int GSM_RX = 16; // RX pin of ESP32 connected to TX of GSM

const int GSM_TX = 17; // TX pin of ESP32 connected to RX of GSM

TinyGPSPlus gps; // Create a TinyGPSPlus object

char auth[] = BLYNK_AUTH_TOKEN;

char ssid[] = "kupal";

char pass[] = "00000000";

// Ultrasonic Sensor Pins for Sensor 1 (Changed)

#define TRIG_PIN_1 12 // GPIO13 (example pin change)

#define ECHO_PIN_1 14 // GPIO14 (example pin change)

// Ultrasonic Sensor Pins for Sensor 2 (New)

#define TRIG_PIN_2 13 // GPIO27 (example pin for the second sensor)

#define ECHO_PIN_2 27 // GPIO26 (example pin for the second sensor)

long duration1, duration2;

float distance1, distance2;

// Soil Moisture Sensor Pin (Analog Pin)

#define SOIL_MOISTURE_PIN 34 // Change this to your selected GPIO pin

 78

// Variable to store soil moisture value

int soilMoistureValue = 0;

int WetThreshold = 3500;

void setup() {

// Initialize Serial Monitor

Serial.begin(115200);

GSM.begin(115200, SERIAL_8N1, GSM_RX, GSM_TX); // Initialize GSM with

RX=16, TX=17

// Begin the hardware serial communication at 9600 baud rate for MP3 module

mp3Serial.begin(9600, SERIAL_8N1, ESP32_RX, ESP32_TX);

// Initialize Blynk

Blynk.begin(auth, ssid, pass, "blynk.cloud", 80);

delay(20000); // Allow GSM module to initialize

// Initialize Ultrasonic Sensor Pins for Sensor 1

pinMode(TRIG_PIN_1, OUTPUT);

pinMode(ECHO_PIN_1, INPUT);

// Initialize Ultrasonic Sensor Pins for Sensor 2

pinMode(TRIG_PIN_2, OUTPUT);
 79

pinMode(ECHO_PIN_2, INPUT);

// Initialize soil moisture sensor pin

pinMode(SOIL_MOISTURE_PIN, INPUT);

// Check GSM module communication

while (!initializeGSM()) {

Serial.println("Error initializing GSM module!");

delay(1000);

// First, select the TF Card (MP3 module command)

mp3Serial.write(0x7E); // Start of instruction

mp3Serial.write(0x03); // Number of bytes excluding start and end byte

mp3Serial.write(0x35); // Command to select the TF card

mp3Serial.write(0x01); // Data (usually 1 byte)

mp3Serial.write(0xEF); // End byte

delay(20); // Small delay to ensure processing

sendSMS("GREETINGS MASTER!");

Serial.println("GSM module ready!");

}
 80

void loop() {

// Process GPS data

while (Serial.available()) {

gps.encode(Serial.read());

// GPS Speed and Location Debugging

if (gps.location.isUpdated()) {

// Print GPS coordinates and speed to Serial Monitor

Serial.print("Latitude: ");

Serial.println(gps.location.lat(), 6);

Serial.print("Longitude: ");

Serial.println(gps.location.lng(), 6);

// Check if speed is available

if (gps.speed.isValid()) {

Serial.print("Speed (km/h) : ");

Serial.println(gps.speed.kmph(), 2); // Display speed in km/h

} else {

Serial.println("Speed data not available yet.");

}
 81

// Send GPS data directly (without waiting for SMS command) for testing

if (gps.location.isUpdated()) {

String gpsData = "Speed (km/h): ";

if (gps.speed.isValid()) {

gpsData += String(gps.speed.kmph(), 2); // Speed with 2 decimal places

} else {

gpsData += "0.00"; // Default speed if unavailable

gpsData += "\nLatitude: " + String(gps.location.lat(), 6);

gpsData += "\nLongitude: " + String(gps.location.lng(), 6);

gpsData += "\n\n" + String(gps.location.lat(), 6) + "," + String(gps.location.lng(), 6); //

CSV format

// Send the formatted GPS data via SMS

sendSMS(gpsData.c_str());

Serial.println("Sent GPS data via SMS:");

Serial.println(gpsData);

// Check for incoming SMS

if (GSM.available()) {
 82

String sms = readSMS();

Serial.println("Received SMS: " + sms); // Debug incoming SMS

if (sms.indexOf("GPS") != -1) {

respondWithGPS();

delay(1000); // Short delay to avoid overwhelming the loop

// Measure distance using Ultrasonic Sensor 1

digitalWrite(TRIG_PIN_1, LOW);

delayMicroseconds(2);

digitalWrite(TRIG_PIN_1, HIGH);

delayMicroseconds(10);

digitalWrite(TRIG_PIN_1, LOW);

duration1 = pulseIn(ECHO_PIN_1, HIGH);

distance1 = (duration1 * 0.034) / 2; // Convert to cm

// Measure distance using Ultrasonic Sensor 2

digitalWrite(TRIG_PIN_2, LOW);

delayMicroseconds(2);

digitalWrite(TRIG_PIN_2, HIGH);
 83

delayMicroseconds(10);

digitalWrite(TRIG_PIN_2, LOW);

duration2 = pulseIn(ECHO_PIN_2, HIGH);

distance2 = (duration2 * 0.034) / 2; // Convert to cm

// Print distance for both sensors to Serial Monitor for debugging

Serial.print("Sensor 1 Distance: ");

Serial.print(distance1);

Serial.println(" cm");

Serial.print("Sensor 2 Distance: ");

Serial.print(distance2);

Serial.println(" cm");

// Read the analog value from the soil moisture sensor

soilMoistureValue = analogRead(SOIL_MOISTURE_PIN);

// Print the soil moisture value to Serial Monitor for debugging

Serial.print("Soil Moisture Value: ");

Serial.println(soilMoistureValue);

if(soilMoistureValue <= WetThreshold)

 84

// Play the first MP3 file from the root directory

Serial.println("Play sound 1");

mp3Serial.write(0x7E); // Start of instruction

mp3Serial.write(0x04); // Number of bytes excluding start and end byte

mp3Serial.write(0x41); // Command to play a file

mp3Serial.write((byte)0x00); // Directory byte (0x00 for root directory)

mp3Serial.write(0x01); // File number (0x01 for the first file)

mp3Serial.write(0x31); // Command to set volume

mp3Serial.write(0x1E); // Max volume (30 in decimal, 0x1E in hex)

mp3Serial.write(0xEF); // End byte

delay(3000); // Wait for 3 seconds

if(distance1 <= 50)

// Play the third MP3 file from the root directory

Serial.println("Play sound 3");

mp3Serial.write(0x7E); // Start of instruction

mp3Serial.write(0x04); // Number of bytes excluding start and end byte

mp3Serial.write(0x41); // Command to play a file

mp3Serial.write((byte)0x00); // Directory byte (0x00 for root directory)

mp3Serial.write(0x03); // File number (0x03 for the third file)

 85

mp3Serial.write(0x31); // Command to set volume

mp3Serial.write(0x1E); // Max volume (30 in decimal, 0x1E in hex)

mp3Serial.write(0xEF); // End byte

delay(3000);

if(distance2 >= 25)

// Play the third MP3 file from the root directory

Serial.println("Play sound 2");

mp3Serial.write(0x7E); // Start of instruction

mp3Serial.write(0x04); // Number of bytes excluding start and end byte

mp3Serial.write(0x41); // Command to play a file

mp3Serial.write((byte)0x00); // Directory byte (0x00 for root directory)

mp3Serial.write(0x02); // File number (0x03 for the third file)

mp3Serial.write(0x31); // Command to set volume

mp3Serial.write(0x1E); // Max volume (30 in decimal, 0x1E in hex)

mp3Serial.write(0xEF); // End byte

delay(3000);

// Virtual Pins

Blynk.virtualWrite(V1, soilMoistureValue);
 86

Blynk.virtualWrite(V9, distance1); // Send Sensor 1 data to V9

Blynk.virtualWrite(V10, distance2); // Send Sensor 2 data to V10

// Run Blynk

Blynk.run();

bool initializeGSM() {

GSM.println("AT"); // Test GSM communication

delay(1000);

if (GSM.available()) {

String response = GSM.readString();

if (response.indexOf("OK") != -1) {

return true;

return false;

void sendSMS(const char *message) {

GSM.println("AT+CMGF=1"); // Set SMS text mode

delay(1000);
 87

GSM.println("AT+CMGS=\"+639318047335\""); // Replace with recipient's phone

number

delay(1000);

GSM.print(message); // Send SMS content

delay(100);

GSM.write(26); // Ctrl+Z to send the SMS

delay(3000); // Wait for message sending

Serial.println("SMS sent!");

String readSMS() {

GSM.println("AT+CMGF=1"); // Set SMS text mode

delay(1000);

GSM.println("AT+CMGL=\"REC UNREAD\""); // Read only unread messages

delay(2000);

String message = "";

while (GSM.available()) {

message += (char)GSM.read();

}
 88

Serial.println("Received SMS: " + message);

return message;

void respondWithGPS() {

if (gps.location.isValid()) {

// Format the GPS data

String gpsData = "Speed (km/h): ";

if (gps.speed.isValid()) {

gpsData += String(gps.speed.kmph(), 2); // Speed with 2 decimal places

} else {

gpsData += "0.00"; // Default speed if unavailable

gpsData += "\nLatitude: " + String(gps.location.lat(), 6);

gpsData += "\nLongitude: " + String(gps.location.lng(), 6);

gpsData += "\n\n" + String(gps.location.lat(), 6) + "," + String(gps.location.lng(), 6); //

CSV format

// Send the formatted GPS data via SMS

sendSMS(gpsData.c_str());

Serial.println("Sent GPS data via SMS:");

 89

Serial.println(gpsData);

} else {

// If GPS data is invalid

String errorMsg = "GPS signal not available.";

sendSMS(errorMsg.c_str());

Serial.println(errorMsg);

#include <Wire.h>

#include <MPU6050.h>

#include <avr/wdt.h> // Required for watchdog reset (for AVR boards like Uno)

MPU6050 mpu;

const int BUZZ_PIN = 8;

const float FREEFALL_THRESHOLD = 0.75;

int buzzCount = 0; // Counter for buzzer activations

const int MAX_BUZZ_COUNT = 3;

void setup() {
 90

Serial.begin(115200);

Wire.begin();

// Initialize MPU6050

mpu.initialize();

if (!mpu.testConnection()) {

Serial.println("MPU6050 connection failed!");

while (1);

Serial.println("MPU6050 Initialized");

// Buzzer setup

pinMode(BUZZ_PIN, OUTPUT);

digitalWrite(BUZZ_PIN, LOW);

void loop() {

int16_t ax, ay, az, gx, gy, gz;

mpu.getMotion6(&ax, &ay, &az, &gx, &gy, &gz);

float accelX = ax / 16384.0;

float accelY = ay / 16384.0;

float accelZ = az / 16384.0;

 91

float totalAccel = sqrt(accelX * accelX +

accelY * accelY +

accelZ * accelZ);

Serial.print("Total Acceleration: ");

Serial.println(totalAccel);

if (totalAccel < FREEFALL_THRESHOLD) {

Serial.println(" Fall Detected! Buzzing for 5 seconds...");

digitalWrite(BUZZ_PIN, HIGH);

delay(5000);

digitalWrite(BUZZ_PIN, LOW);

delay(2000);

buzzCount++;

Serial.print("Buzz Count: ");

Serial.println(buzzCount);

if (buzzCount >= MAX_BUZZ_COUNT) {

Serial.println(" Max buzz count reached. System resetting...");

delay(1000);

wdt_enable(WDTO_15MS); // Enable watchdog with 15ms timeout

while (1); // Wait for reset

 92

} else {

Serial.println("✅ No Fall Detected. Rechecking...");

delay(200);

}
 93

2024

September October November December

WEEK 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

A. TOPIC
SLECTION

Proposing Five
Topics

Choosing and
Preparing for a
Topic/Title

Consultation with
Thesis Adviser

Presentation of
Project Titles to the
Panelists

B. RESEARCH
PROPOSAL
WRITING

Writing Chapter 1

Thesis Adviser
Consultation

Redesigning

Finalizing the
Proposal

C. ORAL
VALIDATION

Preparing the Project

Proposal
Presentation for
Defense

Proposal Defense

Proposal Revision

Table 16
Gantt Chart During the Proposal Stage
 94

2025

January February March April May

WEEK 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3

Submission of Final
Paper

D. PAPER
FORMATTING

Consultation with
Technician

Collection of Money

Updating Chapter 1, 2
and 3

E. BUILDING

Designing the Smart

Blind Stick

Buying of Materials

Assemble the
Components

F. TESTING AND
DATA ANALYSIS

Components Selection
& Initial Prototyping

System Integration &

Coding

Preliminary Testing &

Debugging

User Interface
Optimization

Enclosure Design &

Fabrication

User Testing &

Feedback Collection

System Optimization
(Performance & Power)

G. THESIS
FINALIZATION

Final Validation &

Security Testing

Finalization of Prototype

Table 17
Gantt Chart During the Building Stage
BIBLIOGRAPHY
 96

A. Books/Journals

AIoT-Based smart stick for visually impaired person. (2023). IEEE Journals & Magazine

| IEEE Xplore.

ASME. (n.d.-b). Camera-mounted cane helps visually impaired find objects.

Farooq, M. S., Shafi, I., Khan, H., De La Torre Díez, I., Breñosa, J., Espinosa, J. C. M.,

& Ashraf, I. (2022). IoT enabled intelligent stick for visually impaired people for obstacle

recognition. Sensors, 22(22), 8914.

Fernández-Batanero, J. M., Montenegro-Rueda, M., Fernández-Cerero, J., & García-

Martínez, I. (2022). Assistive technology for the inclusion of students with disabilities: A

systematic review. Educational Technology Research and Development, 70, 1911–1930.

In P. Pareek, S. Mishra, M. J. C. S. Reis, & N. Gupta (Eds.), (2025). Cognitive

Computing and Cyber Physical Systems (pp. xx-xx). Springer.

Multi-functional blind stick for visually impaired people. (2020, June 1). IEEE

Conference Publication | IEEE Xplore.

Nierling, L., & Maia, M. (2020). Assistive technologies: Social barriers and socio-

technical pathways. Societies, 10(2), 41.

Singh, A., & Patel, R. (2023). Mind the gap: Sex and gender disparities in mobility

assistive technology. Assistive Technology, 37(4), 229–230.

 97

Solanki, V., Shirke, S., Mamulwar, V., Phalke, R., Pote, C., & Fulsaundar, P. (2023). A

research paper on smart blind stick. International Journal for Research in Applied

Science and Engineering Technology.

Wikipedia contributors. (2024, September 26). Unified theory of acceptance and use of

technology. Wikipedia.

World Health Organization. (2023, August 10). Blindness and vision impairment.

B. Online Resources

https://agelab.mit.edu/static/uploads/carehive-september-2020-research-note-final.pdf

https://github.com/7supriyo/Smart-blind-stick-with-ultrasonic-sensor

https://hscprojects.com/smart-blind-stick-project-enhancing-navigation-with-sensors-
arduino-and-advanced-features/

https://iris.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665/365268/9789240049178-eng.pdf

https://www.dlsu.edu.ph/wp-content/uploads/pdf/conferences/research-congress-
proceedings/2020/HCT-05.pdf

https://www.sciepub.com/reference/457561

https://studocu.com/ph/document/university-of-rizal-system/bs-information-system/ref-
chapter-1-3-group-2final-rev/75178487

https://techatronic.com/smart-blind-stick-using-arduino-and-ultrasonic-sensor/
APPENDICES
 99

Appendix A
Transmital Letter

DR. EINGILBERT C. BENOLIRAO, Dev. Ed. D

Campus Director

Cebu Technological University - Argao Campus

Ed Kintanar Street Lamacan Argao, Cebu Philippines

Dear Sir,

Greetings!

We, are the 3rd-year students of the Bachelor of Industrial Technology - Major in
Computer Technology at this university, are presently conducting a study entitled
“USER ACCEPTANCE OF SMART BLIND STICK WITH REAL - TIME
MONITORING: AN ASSESSMENT OF THE UTAUT MODEL.” Part of the data
we need for this research will be gathered from the selected municipalities of Cebu,
involving visually impaired individuals. The data and results of this study will remain
strictly confidential and shall only be used for academic purposes.

In line with this, we would like to request for your approval to have our group allowing
us to conduct a survey using our instruments.

Thank you for your kind and utmost consideration.

Respectfully yours,

SUAN, VINCENT V. LABRADOR, FLORA MAE

ROJAS, IANDALE A. GALLENDO, JONA MAE S.
SABADO RALPH LOUISE Q.
Researchers
Noted by:
IRVIN PAUL A. RENDON, PCpE, MSIT FRANCIS E. VILLAMOR,ECE
Adviser Chairman, BIT CT & ET
HELMER M. BAÑADOS.Ph.D.
Dean, College of Technology
Approved by:
DR.EINGILBERT C. BENOLIRAO, Dev.Ed.D
Campus Director
 100

Appendix B

Survey Questionnaire

Part I: Demographic Profile of the Respondents

Instructions: Fill up the following questions honestly. Put a check mark on the box

provided with each statement for your answer.

1. Name (Optional)___________________________________________

1.1 Age: 18-25 26-35 36-45

46-55 56-60 and above

1.2 Gender: Male Female

1.3 Civil Status: Single Married

1.4 Occupation: ________________

1.5 Years of Visual Impairment: 1-3 years 4-6 years

7-10 years and above

 101

Part II: Functionality and Usability of the Smart Blind Stick with Real-Time

Monitoring

Directions: Please indicate your level of agreement or disagreement with each of these
statements. Answer the following statement by putting a check (✓) to the column that
corresponds to your choice or answers. Please be guided by the following.

5- Strongly Agree

4- Agree

3- Neutral

2-Disagree

1-Strongly Disagree

Description Strongly Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly

Agree Disagree
Functionality
(5) (4) (3) (2) (1)

1. The smart blind stick provides

accurate real-time monitoring of the
user's surroundings and obstacles.

2. The real-time notifications or alerts

from the smart blind stick are clear
and easy to understand.

3.The smart blind stick's functionality

improves the user's ability to navigate
independently.

4. The device's sensors function

reliably under various conditions.

5. The smart blind stick's real-time

monitoring system integrates
seamlessly with other assistive
technologies or mobile apps.
 102

Description Strongly Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly

Agree Disagree
Usability
(5) (4) (3) (2) (1)

1 The smart blind stick is easy to use

and operate without extensive
training.

2. The design and ergonomics of the

smart blind stick make it comfortable
to handle for extended periods.

3. The real-time monitoring features

are intuitive and accessible for users
with varying levels of technical skills.

4. The setup and configuration of the

smart blind stick are straightforward
and user-friendly.

5. The smart blind stick's interface is

clear and easy to navigate.
 103

Part III: Perception of the respondents towards the acceptance of the smart blind
stick with real-time monitoring

Directions: Please indicate your level of agreement or disagreement with each of these
statements. Answer the following statement by putting a check (✓) to the column that
corresponds to your choice or answers. Please be guided by the following.

5- Strongly Agree

4- Agree

3- Neutral

2-Disagree

1-Strongly Disagree

Description Strongly Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly

Agree Disagree
Performance Expectancy
(5) (4) (3) (2) (1)

1. I believe the Smart Blind Stick will

improve my mobility and
independence.

2. The device will allow me to

navigate challenging environments
safely.

3. Using the Smart Blind Stick will

make my daily activities easier to
perform.

4. The Smart Blind Stick will

enhance my ability to detect
obstacles.

5. With the Smart Blind Stick, I will

feel more confident when walking
outdoors.
 104

Directions: Please indicate your level of agreement or disagreement with each of these
statements. Answer the following statement by putting a check (✓) to the column that
corresponds to your choice or answers. Please be guided by the following.

5- Strongly Agree

4- Agree

3- Neutral

2-Disagree

1-Strongly Disagree

Description Strongly Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly

Agree Disagree
Effort Expectancy
(5) (4) (3) (2) (1)

1. I believe the Smart Blind Stick will

improve my mobility and
independence.

2. The device will allow me to

navigate challenging environments
safely.

3. Using the Smart Blind Stick will

make my daily activities easier to
perform.

4. The Smart Blind Stick will

enhance my ability to detect
obstacles.

5. With the Smart Blind Stick, I will

feel more confident when walking
outdoors.
 105

Directions: Please indicate your level of agreement or disagreement with each of these
statements. Answer the following statement by putting a check (✓) to the column that
corresponds to your choice or answers. Please be guided by the following.

5- Strongly Agree

4- Agree

3- Neutral

2-Disagree

1-Strongly Disagree

Description Strongly Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly

Agree Disagree
Social Influence
(5) (4) (3) (2) (1)

1. My family members encourage me

to use the Smart Blind Stick
regularly.

2. Healthcare professionals
recommend the use of assistive
devices like the Smart Blind Stick.

3. I feel supported by my community

in using the Smart Blind Stick.

4. I feel motivated to use the Smart

Blind Stick because others
recommend it.

5. Using the Smart Blind Stick is

considered socially acceptable in my
community.
 106

Directions: Please indicate your level of agreement or disagreement with each of these
statements. Answer the following statement by putting a check (✓) to the column that
corresponds to your choice or answers. Please be guided by the following.

5- Strongly Agree

4- Agree

3- Neutral

2-Disagree

1-Strongly Disagree

Description Strongly Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly

Agree Disagree
Facilitating Conditions
(5) (4) (3) (2) (1)

1. I have access to adequate resources

to learn how to use the smart blind
stick effectively."

2. There is sufficient technical

support available to assist me with
using the smart blind stick."

3. I have easy access to maintenance

or repair services for the smart blind
stick if it malfunctions.

4. The necessary technological

infrastructure available to fully utilize
the real-time monitoring features of
the smart blind stick.
5. Setting up the smart blind stick and
connecting it to its monitoring system
is easy and requires minimal
assistance.
 107

Directions: Please indicate your level of agreement or disagreement with each of these
statements. Answer the following statement by putting a check (✓) to the column that
corresponds to your choice or answers. Please be guided by the following.

5- Strongly Agree

4- Agree

3- Neutral

2-Disagree

1-Strongly Disagree

Description Strongly Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly

Agree Disagree
Behavioral Intention
(5) (4) (3) (2) (1)

1. I intend to use the Smart Blind

Stick frequently in the future.

2. I would recommend the Smart

Blind Stick to other visually
impaired individuals.

3. I am likely to purchase the Smart

Blind Stick if it becomes available..

4. I would prioritize the Smart Blind

Stick over other assistive devices for
navigation.
5. I am confident in my ability to use
the Smart Blind Stick effectively and
independently.
CURRICULUM VITAE
 109

Vincent V. Suan

Proper Malones, Malones, Dalaguete, Cebu

Cebu, Philippines 6022

Mobile No.: 09955701076

E-mail address: [email protected]

PERSONAL PARTICULARS:

Age: 21

Sex: Male

Date of Birth: April 14, 2003

Religion: Roman Catholic

Nationality: Filipino

Civil Status: Single

Father’s Name: Vicente S. Suan

Mother’s Name: Elenita V. Suan

EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND:

College: Cebu Technological University – Argao Campus

High School: Cawayan National High School

Elementary: Malones Elementary School

 110

Ian Dale A. Rojas

Simala, Sibonga, Cebu

Cebu, Philippines

Mobile No.: 09636417466

E-mail address: [email protected]

PERSONAL PARTICULARS:

Age: 20

Sex: Male

Date of Birth: September 4, 2004

Religion: Roman Catholic

Nationality: Filipino

Civil Status: Single

Father’s Name: Cornelio A. Rojas Jr.

Mother’s Name: Marlyn A. Rojas

EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND:

College: Cebu Technological University – Argao Campus

High School: Ramon E. Bacaltos National High School

Elementary: Simala Elementary School

 111

Ralph Louise Q. Sabado

Talaytay, Argao, Cebu

Cebu, Philippines 6021

Mobile No.: 09427153213

E-mail address: [email protected]

PERSONAL PARTICULARS:

Age: 21

Sex: Male

Date of Birth: October 6, 2003

Religion: Roman Catholic

Nationality: Filipino

Civil Status: Single

Father’s Name: Crisanto Sabado

Mother’s Name: Vicenta Sabado

EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND:

College: Cebu Technological University – Argao Campus

High School: Argao National High School

Elementary: Talaytay Elementary School

 112

Flora Mae Labrador

Looc, Poblacion, Argao, Cebu

Cebu, Philippines 6021

Mobile No.: 09950875668

E-mail address: [email protected]

PERSONAL PARTICULARS:

Age: 21

Sex: Female

Date of Birth: August 12, 2003

Religion: Roman Catholic

Nationality: Filipino

Civil Status: Single

Father’s Name: Floro Galileo Wamelda

Mother’s Name: Narcisa Labrador

EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND:

College: Cebu Technological University – Argao Campus

High School: Argao National High School

Elementary: Argao Central Elementary School

 113

Jona Mae S. Gallendo

Bulasa, Argao, Cebu

Cebu, Philippines 6021

Mobile No.: 09638733851

E-mail address: [email protected]

PERSONAL PARTICULARS:

Age: 21

Sex: Female

Date of Birth: September 24, 2003

Religion: Roman Catholic

Nationality: Filipino

Civil Status: Single

Father’s Name: Jerry Gallendo

Mother’s Name: Lolita Gallendo

EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND:

College: Cebu Technological University – Argao Campus

High School: Bulasa National High School

Elementary: Bulasa Elementary School