posted by user: Beate_Ochsner || 1814 views || tracked by 1 users: [display]

Disability_Gaming 2021 : Disability and Video Games: Practices of En-/Disabling Modes of Digital Gaming


When Mar 9, 2021 - Apr 15, 2021
Where Konstanz, Germany
Submission Deadline Apr 15, 2021
Notification Due Apr 30, 2021
Final Version Due Sep 15, 2021
Categories    game studies   disability studies   media studies   design

Call For Papers

Call for Papers: Disability and Video Games: Practices of En-/Disabling Modes of Digital Gaming (Edited Book).

Beate Ochsner & Markus Spöhrer (University of Konstanz, Germany)

Deadline for Abstracts: 15.04.2021 (300 words)
Notification Due 30.04.2021
Deadline for papers: 15.09.2021

Please submit your abstracts:

Concerns with the accessibility and adaptability of digital games, corresponding gaming platforms as well as peripheral devices have been uttered from different perspectives and sources during the last decades. Interestingly, subcultural or amateur DIY-accessibility practices have been documented since the mid-1970s. Counterplaying the arcade game Touch Me (Atari 1974) as a game for blind persons (cf. Kirke, 2018, p. 66; Spöhrer, 2019, p. 91), reconfiguring and adjusting Atari 2600 game controllers to left-handed persons or persons with differently abled bodies (cf. Morgenstern, 1983, p.4), the evaluation of games in terms of accessible use such as done by the Audissey magazine from 1996-2006 (cf. Spöhrer 2021), developing, providing and discussing about amateur audio games for blind persons as in the case of (Spöhrer, 2021) or online guides to subtitles or closed captions tools for Deaf persons (e.g. Baker, 2020) as well as other communities of ‘accessible play’, both profit and non-profit organizations, such as for example AbleGamers or the numerous online message boards on the topic.
Meanwhile, however, the issues of game accessibility, inclusive gaming and ‘disabled gamers’ have been recognized by academia (e.g. Atkinson et al., 2006; Hofmann, Hoppe, Jantke, 2010; Yuan, Folmer, Harris, 2011; Mangiron, Orero, O’Hagan, 2014; Gibbons 2015; Miesenberger, Kouroupetroglou, 2018, pp. 241-290; Parisi, 2017; Ellis, Kao, 2019) and gaming industries (e.g. Mut, 2019; Geraldo, 2020). The latter is manifest in a variety of marketing decisions and promotional campaigns during the last decade. Prominent examples are multi-accessible consoles such as the Nintendo Wii, the alternative, non-normative ‘bodily techniques’ (cf. Parisi, 2009) and a variety of therapeutic modes of play (cf. Pearson, Bailey, 2007; Shih, Chen, Shih, 2012) of which the wireless Wii-Mote Control as well as the ‘Balance Board’ are capable of enabling. Further examples are Nintendo’s accessibility policy in case of the Nintendo 3DS (cf. Schröter, 2011, pp. 100-101), the therapeutic use of the ‘physical’ interface of the Microsoft Kinect (cf. Chang et al., 2012); the growing number of games with a wide range of accessibility options in the last 10 years, such as closed captioning, audio and graphic adjustability, enlargeable subtitles, adjustment of game-speed, custom button-layout and compatibility with alternative peripheral devices; as well as recently the introduction of the Microsoft Adaptive Controller, a peripheral device that is customizable in relation to individual physical or sensory bodily setups. Interestingly enough, acceptance of accessibility issues in digital gaming by public institutions, governments, commissions and organizations remains comparatively moderate – with the exception of developments in the area of therapy and serious gaming.
In contrast and likewise, research on accessible design and the development (e.g. Grammenos, Savidis, Stephanidis, 2009; Kwon, 2012; Antona, Stephanidis, 2015; Brown, Anderson 2020) of games as therapy and assistive technology – mostly from medical, pedagogical or designer perspective – as well as on gaming and well-being (e.g. Jung et al., 2009; Pallavicini, Ferrari, Mantovani, 2018) is plentiful. In some cases, an effort is even made to conceptualize and develop technologies that grant ‘universal accessibility’ (e.g. Grammenos, Stephanidis, Savidis, 2009). The idea of a universal design that translates and subjectifies individual body types and different abilities according to the model of “a normative, or standardized, body” (Boluk, LeMieux, 2017, p. 40;) is, however, a highly problematic imposition of hegemonic ableist concepts of dis/ability (cf. Parisi, 2017; cf. Sterne, Mills, 2017, p. 365). Focusing on how differences or interferences, such as disability, gender, and class are made and unmade in sociotechnical practices, designer Sara Hendren, however, asks “how might we reflect our mediated landscape as a built environment in which differently abled people have varying degrees of access both as consumers and producers?” (cit. in Cleary, 2020, p. 61; cf. Hendren, 2020). In a similar way, Aimi Hamraie, in her book on Building Access: Universal Design and the Politics of Disability (2017) shows that Universal Design was not just an approach to creating new products or spaces, but also a sustained, understated activist movement challenging dominant understandings of disability in architecture, medicine, and society.
Interestingly enough, Disability Studies, Game Studies and Cultural Studies have only rarely dealt with Disability and Games, with some notable exceptions (e.g Parisi, 2009, 2017; Ellis, Kent, 2011; Ledder, 2019), despite disability researcher’s distinctive interest in digital media and disability (cf. Elcessor, 2016; Goggin, 2012). Some scholars have analyzed the representation and negotiations of disability in digital games, focusing on the reworking of disabled bodies as a means of othering and a fortification of hierarchical power structures (e.g. Carr, 2014, 2020; Ledder, 2015; Plank, 2018). Others focus on the effectiveness of serious games on persons with different disabilities or so-called “exergames” respectively (Freyermuth, Gotto, Wallenfels, Fabian, 2013; Garcia-Redondo, 2019). While these publications offer valuable insights into narrative and discursive constructions of dis/ability – in accordance with research on development of accessible games and game usage – , little has been said about the modes of en-/disabling digital gaming that occur as a reciprocal process between a wide range of heterogeneous elements involved in gaming situations. As Mara Mills and Jonathan Sterne pointed out, a majority of approaches to the relations between media and disability often continue to “rely on concepts whose ableist genealogies have been forgotten” (2017, p. 365). This equally applies to the practices of gaming that are often neglected in favor of the narrative, systemic elements or the aesthetics of the game. We therefore propose, as a critical counterpart to the lacking self-reflection of both disability and game studies, a new perspective focusing on the co-construction of gaming and dis/ability through en- or disabling practices of gaming. Recent publications that apply Science & Technology approaches to game research, have reconceptualized digital gaming as processes that are conditioned, enacted and ‘played out’ in fluid actor-networks (Giddings, 2009), sociotechnical arrangements (Waldrich 2019) or specific ‘gaming situations’ (Spöhrer, 2020). Instead of departing from an ‘ideal player’, stable interfaces, generalizable sociocultural contexts or systemic models of games, such approaches highlight the relationality of digital gaming, the situated en- or disabling of modes of ‘inlusio’ (Huizinga 2003[1949], pp. 10-11; also see Spöhrer, Waldrich, 2020) and the processes of ‘being-in-play’ (Gadamer 1986), that are mediatized by the interplay of human and non-human elements. Usually such approaches opt for an ethnographic methodological tool-kit in order to grasp the situativeness and the corresponding situated modes of play. Likewise, Disability Studies engage in similar approaches: Michael Schillmeier’s (2010) concept of “en-/disabling” practices, for example, in which the interrelated materialities, bodies, objects and sensory practices shape and configure spaces, experiences and discourses, could help to ask how ‘playing a game’ and ‘being-in-play’, as a process, is enabled or disabled in and through (everyday) practices, materials and socio-technical environments (cf. Mol, 2020, pp. 1-27).
The proposed edited book intends to fill this research gap by examining the following, non-exhaustive, questions and topics from an interdisciplinary perspective and with regard to a variety of topics – both from a theoretical perspective or with regard to case studies:
• Gaming and Dis/Ability Studies: How can game studies profit from a disability studies perspective of en-/abling gaming and issues of disability and ableism and vice versa? How can we conceptualize gaming practices and processes in terms of “dismediation” (Mills, Sterne, 2017)? How can (auto-)ethnographical, sociological and media studies’ methodological tools be used to describe such en-/disabling gaming practices?
• How does digital gaming prescribe, translate and configure specific ‘normalizing’ sets of bodily and cultural techniques? In which way are tacit and body knowledge involved in this process and how can these be described as a means of en-/disabling? How can these practices be understood as a means of disobedience? How are power structures generated and reinforced in such processes?
• How do gaming interfaces translate and configure ”ideal bodies” (cf. Parisi, 2017) and which strategies of ‘enabling’ gaming can be used to counteract such ”disabling infrastructures” (cf. Parisi 2017)? (DIY-practices, Adaptive Controllers or the use and construction of individual peripheral devices, subcultures of ‘enabling’ gameplay). How are modes of capitalist or neoliberal ‘normalization’ inscribed in such processes?
• By taking into account the manifold requirements, digital gaming generates: Can digital games and gaming literacy be describe as inherently ‘disabling’? In which way is gaming related to adaption and translation processes that require the players, technologies and gaming systems to adapt to each other in order to enable gaming processes?
• Sensory practices: How are senses addressed, configured, translated or en-/disabled in concrete gaming practices? How can sensory and digital ethnography help to research such practices? How can these practices vary among different systems and sensory output and input devices? (Virtual Reality Systems, Audio Games, haptic games, commercial audiovisual games etc., vibration controllers and vibration vests)

Atkinson, Matthew T. et al (2006): Making the Mainstream Accessible: Redefining the Game. In: Sandbox Symposium (Eds.): Proceedings of ACM SIGGRAPH Symposium on Videogames, Boston, Massachusetts, July 30-31, pp. 21-28. Online available: (last accessed: Dec 20, 2020).+
Antona, Margherita; Stephanidis, Constantine (2015): Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction Access to Learning, Health and Well-Being. Cham, CH et al.: Springer.
Baker, Morgan (2020): Deaf Accessibility in Video Games. In: Gamasutra. Online available: (last accessed: Dec 20, 2020).
Boluk, Stephanie; Le Mieux, Patrick (2017): Metagaming: Playing, Competing, Spectating, Cheating, Trading, Making, and Breaking Videogames. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Brown, Mark; Anderson, Sky LaRell (2020): Designing for Disability: Evaluating the State of Accessibility Design in Video Games. In: Games and Culture. Online available: (last accessed: Jan 20, 2020).
Carr, Diane (2014): Ability, Disability and Dead Space. Game Studies: International Journal of Computer Game Research, 14(2). Online available: (last accessed: Dec 20, 2020).
Carr, Diane (2020): Bodies That Count: Augmentation, Community, and Disability in a Science Fiction Game.Journal of Literary & Cultural Disability Studies: 14(4), 4., S. 421–436. DOI: 10.3828/jlcds.2020.28.
Chang, Chien-Yen et al. (2012): Towards Pervasive Physical Rehabilitation Using Microsoft Kinect. 2012 6th International Conference on Pervasive Computing Technologies for Healthcare (PervasiveHealth) and Workshops. Online available: (last accessed: Dec 20, 2020).
Cleary, Krystal (2018): Disability Studies. Feminist Media Histories, 4(2), pp. 61–66.
Elcessor, Elizabeth (2016): Restricted Access: Media, Disability, and the Politics of the Digital. New York: UP.
Ellis, Katie; Kent, Mike (2011): Disability and New Media. New York: Routledge.
Ellis, Katie; Yao, Kai-Ti (2019): Who Gets to Play? Disability, Open Literacy, Gaming. Cultural Science Journal, 11(1), pp. 111-125.
Goggin, Gerard (2012): New Technologies and the Media. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.European Commission (2012): The State of Play of Digital Games for Empowerment and Inclusion: A Review of the Literature and Empirical Cases. Luxembourg, BE: Publications Office of the European Union.
Freyermuth, Gundolf S.; Gotto, Lisa; Wallenfells, Fabian (Eds.) (2013): Serious Games, Exergames, Exerlearning. Zur Transmedialisierung und Gamification des Wissenstransfers. Bielefeld: transcript.
Gadamer, Hans-Georg (1986): The Relevance of the Beautiful. London: Cambridge University Press.
García-Redondo, Patricia; García, Trinidad; Areces, Débora; Núñez, José Carlos; Rodríguez, Celestino (2019): Serious Games and Their Effect Improving Attention in Students with Learning Disabilities. International journal of environmental research and public health 16 (14). Online Available: DOI: 10.3390/ijerph16142480 (last accessed: Jan 20, 2020).
Geraldo, Renata (2020): Game Makers Battle to Boost Accessibility for Players with Disabilities. Bloomberg. Online available: (last accesses Dec 20, 2020)
Gibbons, Sarah (2015): Disability, Neurological Diversity, and Inclusive Play: An Examination of the Social and Political Aspects of the Relationship between Disability and Games. Loading … The Journal of the Canadian Game Studies Association 9 (14).
Grammenos, Dimitris; Savidis, Anthony; Stephanidis, Constantine (2009): Designing Universally Accessible Games. ACM Computers in Entertainment, 7(1), pp. 1-29
Hamraie, Aimi (2017): Building Access. Universal Design and the Politics of Disability. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Hendren, Sara (2020): What Can a Body Do? How We Meet the Built World. New York: Riverhead.
Hofmann, Andrea; Hoppe, Imke; Jantke, Klaus (2010): The Need for Special Games for Gamers with Special Needs. In: Cordeiro, José et al. (Eds.): Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Computer Supported Education - (Volume 1). New York: ACM, pp. 220-225.
Hendren, Sara (2020): What can a body do? How we meet the built world. New York: Riverhead Books.
Huizinga, Johan (2003[1949]): Homo Ludens: A Study of the Play-Element in Culture. London: Routledge
Jung, Younbo et al. (2009): Games for a Better Life: Effects of Playing Wii Games on the Well-Being of Seniors in a Long-Term Care Facility. IE '09: Proceedings of the Sixth Australasian Conference on Interactive Entertainment, pp. 1-6. Online available: (last accessed: Dec 19, 2020).
Kirke, Alexis (2018): When the Soundtrack Is the Game: From Audio-Games to Gaming the Music. In: Williams, Duncan & Lee, Newton (Eds.): Emotion in Video Game Soundtracking. Cham, CH, pp. 65-83.
Kwon, Jungmin (2012): The Development of Educational and/or Training Computer Games for Students with Disabilities. Intervention in School and Clinic, 48(2), pp. 87–98.
Ledder, Simon (2015): Die Produktion von „Verbesserung“ und „Behinderung“ in digitalen Spielen. In: Ranisch, Robert; Rockoff, Marcus; Schuol, Sebastian (Eds.). Selbstgestaltung des Menschen durch Biotechniken. Tübinger Studien zur Ethik Bd. 2. Tübingen, DE: Francke, pp. 253-269.
Ledder, Simon (2019): On Dis/ability Within Game Studies: The Discursive Construction of Ludic Bodies. In: Ellis, Katie et al. (Eds.): Interdisciplinary Approaches to Disability: Looking Towards the Future. Vol 2. New York: Routledge, pp. 30-44.
Mangiron, Carmen; Orero, Pilar; O’Hagan, Minako (2014): Fun for All: Translation and Accessibility Practices in Video Games. Bern: Peter Lang.
Miesenberger, Klaus; Kouroupetroglou, Georgios (2018): Computers Helping People with Special Needs. Cham, CH: Springer.
Mol, Annemarie (2002): The Body Multiple: Ontology in Medical Practice. Durham and London: UP.
Morgenstern, Steve (1983): Make Your Own Left-Handed Joystick. AtariAge Magazine, 1(5), pp. 1-16.
Mut, Chirs (2019): Accessibility Finally Matters to the Game Industry — But it Needs to do Better. VentureBeat. Online available: (last accessed: Dec 20, 2020)
Pallavicini, Federica; Ferrari, Ambra; Mantovani, Fabrizia (2018): Video Games for Well-Being: A Systematic Review on the Application of Computer Games for Cognitive and Emotional Training in the Adult Population. Frontiers in Psychology, 9(2127). Online available: (last accessed: Dec 18, 2020)
Parisi, David (2009): Game Interfaces as Bodily Techniques. In: Ferdig, Richard E. (Ed.): Handbook of Research on Effective Electronic Gaming in Education. Hershey, PA: IGI Global, pp. 111-126.
Parisi, David (2017): Game Interfaces as Disabling Infrastructures. In: Analog Game Studies, 5(1). Online available: (last accessed: Dec 20, 2020).
Pearson, Elaine; Bailey, Chris (2007): Evaluating the Potential of the Nintendo Wii to Support Disabled Students in Education. In: Proceedings ascilite Singapore 2007, pp. 833-836. Online available: (last accessed: Dec 21, 2020).
Plank, Dana, M. (2018): Bodies in Play: Representations of Disability in 8- and 16-bit Video Game Soundscapes (Dissertation). Online available: (last accessed: Jan 4, 2020).
Schillmeier, Michael (2012): Rethinking Disability: Bodies, Senses, and Things. New York: Routledge.
Schröter, Jens (2011): Die Ästhetik des Nintendo 3DS. In: Beil, Benjamin; Bonner, Marc; Hensel, Thomas (Eds): Computer-Spiel-Bilder. Glückstadt, DE: VWH, pp. 91-107.
Shih, Ching-Hsiang; Chen, Ling-Che; Shih, Ching-Tien (2012): Assisting People with Disabilities to Actively Improve their Collaborative Physical Activities with Nintendo Wii Balance Boards by Controlling Environmental Stimulation. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 33(1), pp. 39-44.
Spöhrer, Markus (2019): Playing with Auditory Environments in Audio Games: Snake 3D. In: Spöhrer, Markus (Ed.): Analytical Frameworks, Applications, and Impacts of ICT and Actor-Network Theory. Hershey, PA: IGI Global, pp. 87-111.
Spöhrer, Markus; Waldrich, Harald (2020): Einspielungen: Situationen und Prozesse digitalen Spielens. Bielefeld: Springer VS.
Spöhrer, Markus (2020): The Neglected Gaming Situation. In: Spöhrer, Markus; Waldrich, Harald (Eds.): Einspielungen: Situationen und Prozesse digitalen Spielens. Bielefeld: Springer VS, pp. 21-58.
Spöhrer, Markus (2021): “Hear the Difference”: Audio Game Prosumer Communities in a Postmedia Context. From Audyssey to In: AUGENblick: Konstanzer Hefte zur Medienwissenschaft (in print).
Sterne, Jonathan; Mills, Mara (2017): Dismediation: Three Propositions and Six Tactics (Afterword). In E. Ellcessor, Elizabet; Kirkpatrick, Bill (Eds.): Disability Media Studies: Media, Popular Culture, and the Meanings of Disability. New York: UP, pp. 365-378
Yuan, Bei; Folmer, Eelke; Harris, Frederick J. (2011): Game Accessibility: A Survey. Universal Access in the Information Society, 10, pp. 81–100
Waldrich, Harald (2019): The Socio-Technical Arrangement of Gaming. In; M. Spöhrer, Markus (Ed): Analytical Frameworks, Applications, and Ampacts of ICT and Actor-Network Theory (S. 53-

Related Resources

ICIP 2024   International Conference on Image Processing
IJME 2024   International Journal of Microelectronics Engineering
AVSS 2024   20th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Video and Signal-Based Surveillance
VLSICS 2024   International Journal of VLSI design & Communication Systems
IberSPEECH 2024   IberSPEECH - XIII Jornadas en Tecnologías del Habla and IX Iberian SLTech
ISPiF 2024   Call for Abstracts - 2024 Meeting on Frontiers and Borders in Philosophy and Film
SRF Online 2024   SRF Conference Series 2024 - Filling and Surrounding the World: Pan(en)theism in a Scientific Age
BAMC 2024   The 5th Barcelona Conference on Arts, Media & Culture (BAMC2024)
Design 2024   Eighteenth International Conference on Design Principles & Practices
ICVIP 2024   2024 The 8th International Conference on Video and Image Processing (ICVIP 2024)