# Towards Inclusive Avatars: Disability Representation in Avatar Platforms

Kelly Mack  Snap Inc. and Paul G. Allen School of Computer Science, University
of WashingtonSeattleWAUSA ,  Rai Ching Ling Hsu  Snap Inc.TorontoOntarioCanada
,  Andrés Monroy-Hernández  Snap Inc. and Princeton UniversityPrincetonNJUSA ,
Brian A. Smith  Snap Inc. and Columbia UniversityNew YorkNYUSA and  Fannie Liu
Snap Inc. and JPMorgan ChaseNew YorkNYUSA

(2023)

###### Abstract.

Digital avatars are an important part of identity representation, but there is
little work on understanding how to represent disability. We interviewed 18
people with disabilities and related identities about their experiences and
preferences in representing their identities with avatars. Participants
generally preferred to represent their disability identity if the context felt
safe and platforms supported their expression, as it was important for feeling
authentically represented. They also utilized avatars in strategic ways: as a
means to signal and disclose current abilities, access needs, and to raise
awareness. Some participants even found avatars to be a more accessible way to
communicate than alternatives. We discuss how avatars can support disability
identity representation because of their easily customizable format that is
not strictly tied to reality. We conclude with design recommendations for
creating platforms that better support people in representing their disability
and other minoritized identities.

disability; avatars; identity; inclusion

††journalyear: 2023††copyright: rightsretained††conference: Proceedings of the
2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems; April 23–28, 2023;
Hamburg, Germany††booktitle: Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human
Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’23), April 23–28, 2023, Hamburg,
Germany††doi: 10.1145/3544548.3581481††isbn: 978-1-4503-9421-5/23/04

##  1\. Introduction

People use avatars to represent themselves and express their identity in
online environments, ranging from messaging apps to virtual reality (VR),
i.e., the metaverse. However, options to represent disability in avatars are
often limited or fully missing on popular platforms. Disability affects
billions of people and can be a core, positive part of identity (Shakespeare,
1996). When excluded from the design process, people with disabilities can be
left feeling neglected and invisible as virtual worlds become more
commonplace. While prior work has studied how people portray and describe
disability and other identity characteristics in pictures or stock photos
(James Edwards et al., 2021; Bennett et al., 2021), as well as other
identities like gender in video game contexts (McArthur et al., 2015; Passmore
and Mandryk, 2018; Morgan et al., 2020), people with disabilities are often
left out of avatar research (Mott et al., 2019). One recent work focuses on
blind or low vision (BLV) and d/Deaf or Hard of Hearing (DHH) people’s
experiences with avatars in VR (Zhang et al., 2022), but more research is
needed to understand how those findings extend to social applications more
broadly and with other disabilities, including invisible disabilities. We
investigate how people with disabilities express and want to express their
disabled identities digitally with avatars.

To study how people with disabilities use and wish to use avatars to represent
their identities, we interviewed 18 people who identified as disabled,
chronically ill, mentally ill, neurodiverse, and/or fat.  While not everyone
in these groups may identify as disabled, they share similar experiences of
moving through the world with non-normative bodies and minds, which are
relevant to making avatars more inclusive. We recruited people with a diverse
range of ability statuses (including people with multiple disabilities), race,
gender, and sexuality. More specifically, we investigated the research
questions: (1) How do disabled people represent disability in avatars today?
(2) How can avatars better represent disabled peoples’ experiences and
identities? And (3) When and why do people share disability identities or
experiences using avatars?

Our findings focus on how context can affect people’s desire to represent
their disability in their avatar, as well as how avatars can be more
accessible than other forms of communication. Further, we highlight the
different customizable components of avatars and how each could be used to
represent disabilities and disabled experiences. Finally, participants
discussed how norms and beliefs from both the physical world and avatar
platforms shape each other, including the negative impact of biases and
stereotypes that persist in avatars. Overall, we find many opportunities for
avatars to help disabled people represent and even affirm their
identities—provided that avatar platforms understand and support their needs.

In summary, this work contributes:

  * •

Insights into how avatars function as a form of identity expression, including
for people with invisible or fluctuating disabilities

  * •

Examples of how avatars can provide accessible ways of communicating,
especially about disability

  * •

A characterization of how different dimensions of avatars can support
disability representations

  * •

A list of design considerations for building avatar platforms that support
disability representation

##  2\. Background and Related Work

We first provide background on two central topics of this paper: disability
and digital avatars. We then discuss identity representation in avatars and
its fluctuation, specifically focusing on the affordances to people with
minoritized identities like disability.

###  2.1. The Social Model of Disability

While there are several models of disability (Cobley, 2018), we adopt the
social model of disability that views people as disabled not because of their
physical impairments, but because of social barriers that were created by a
world that did not consider all bodies and minds and variations in ability
(Shakespeare et al., 2006; Goering, 2015; Barnes, 2019). Oftentimes HCI
accessibility research focuses primarily on people with sensory-related
disabilities (e.g., blind, mobility impairment, deaf) (Mack et al., 2021).
However, in this work, we seek to include other, less considered groups, such
as people who are neurodiverse or chronically ill, as they all often share
experiences of facing social barriers because of these identities. Adopting a
social model view of disability allows for a positive view of disability
identity based on both personal experience and the disability community’s
shared experiences, culture, and political agendas (Shakespeare, 1996).
Therefore, regarding avatars, taking the lens of the social model of
disability leaves space for identity pride and community to be at the
forefront of disability representation in avatars.

###  2.2. Introduction to Digital Avatars

Prior research defines digital avatars (which we refer to as “avatars”) in a
variety of ways, but most definitions agree that an avatar “represents the
user in a digital environment” and that the avatar “enable[s] the user to
experience and interact within the spaces of digitally mediated worlds” (Nowak
and Fox, 2018). In this work, we focus specifically on humanoid/human-like
avatars. Humanoid avatars can range from static pictures of avatars (e.g.,
profile pictures on social media) to 3D renderings of humanoids that can
interact with their environments (e.g., video game avatars). The customizable
features of an avatar vary from platform to platform, but many enable the
creator to alter a host of physical characteristics such as hairstyles, facial
features, skin tone, height, weight/build, clothing, and poses. Other
platforms allow customization around the actions the avatar can perform. For
example, in The Sims 4 (Arts, 2014), and Grand Theft Auto V (Games, 2013),
players can customize how the avatar walks. Additionally, some platforms allow
users to add backgrounds, words, and objects or props for additional
customization (see Figure 1). We further scope our focus on avatars that can
be customized in physical appearance and/or clothing.

People can use avatars in various digital spaces and interactions, from video
games to social apps. Several social app avatars are available on their native
platforms for messaging purposes. For example, on iMessage, users can record
their Memojis making different faces, and Meta, Memoji, and Bitmoji avatars
enable users to share stickers (preset scenes or phrases) with their avatars
in text messages, social media posts, and email.

(a) Avatars can incorporate assistive technologies or other objects to express
their current mood or situation.

(b) Avatars can incorporate words and backgrounds, often in a cartoon style.

Figure 1. These Meta avatars demonstrate how one can add cartoon objects and
annotations for a message.

Two avatars. The first is a black person with braided black hair in a
wheelchair laughing with little bubbles letter ”ha’s” everywhere. The second
is a white person with shoulder-length brown hair slumped over in a trash can
waving a white flag with the words ”i give up.”

###  2.3. Avatars and Identity

In interactions with others, Goffman posits that people manage how they
present themselves, trying to balance how they want to represent themselves
and how they want others to perceive and interact with them (Goffman, 1959).
More recent work found that even in virtual interactions with avatars, self-
presentation is important. When using a customized avatar, users can feel it
reflects their identities in the physical world and feel more physiologically
aroused (Morgan et al., 2020; Bailey et al., 2009). How strongly a person
feels connected to their avatar depends on several factors, including social
norms and how well the avatar reflects their actual versus ideal self (Nowak
and Fox, 2018; Jin and Park, 2009; Jin, 2009).  Indeed, avatars present an
opportunity to present parts of an ideal or true self that are not visible in
the physical world (Kafai et al., 2010b).

####  2.3.1. Context Affects Identity Presentation

Prior work categorized people’s goals when making avatars into realistic,
idealized, or fantastical/unrealistic versions of oneself (Turkle, 1994;
Neustaedter and Fedorovskaya, 2009). Choosing from these categories and
choosing which parts of identity to highlight or hide often depends on context
(Turkle, 1999; Bruckman, 1996; Haimson and Hoffmann, 2016). For example, in
video games, people are encouraged to express themselves in any way, even if
it doesn’t align with their physical-world appearance; thus, visibly disabled
people often choose to present as nondisabled (Davis and Stanovsek, 2021;
Gerling et al., 2016; Zhang et al., 2022). On the other hand, in text messages
or social media posts, people prefer to closely couple their real life and
avatar appearances (Zhang et al., 2022; Freeman and Maloney, 2021).  The
intended audience of the online persona can further affect choices around
presenting oneself (and one’s identities), such as work colleagues versus
friends (DiMicco and Millen, 2007). Further, when making idealized or
unrealistic avatars, users have the opportunity to try on new identities
altogether (Haimson and Hoffmann, 2016; Bruckman, 1996; Morgan et al., 2020),
thus providing a venue for experimentation at a low risk compared to the
physical world (Turkle, 1999).

####  2.3.2. Minoritized Identities in Avatars

Prior work in HCI investigating identity and avatars largely found that biased
assumptions about users were built into customization platforms (Passmore and
Mandryk, 2018; Higgin, 2009; Leonard, 2006; Pace et al., 2009; Pace, 2008;
Consalvo, 2003; McArthur and Jenson, 2014; McArthur et al., 2015; Kafai et
al., 2010a). For example, studies found that certain games chose defaults that
perpetuated racial stereotypes, such as white skin tones for protagonists and
darker skin tones for antagonists (McArthur et al., 2015; Leonard, 2006).
Moreover, changing skin color is not enough to represent people of color more
broadly (McArthur et al., 2015); shapes of eyes, mouths, hairstyles, and hair
textures are also key physical characteristics (Passmore and Mandryk, 2018).
Minoritized genders and sexualities have similarly been underrepresented or
represented in biased ways (e.g., defaulting to male avatars, hyper-
sexualizing female avatars) (McArthur and Jenson, 2014; Consalvo, 2003;
McArthur et al., 2015). Researchers have suggested different strategies to
mitigate bias, including allowing for diverse pronouns (Morgan et al., 2020),
allowing for any combination of physical characteristics, avoiding male-female
dichotomies (Morgan et al., 2020; McArthur et al., 2015), and avoiding non-
randomized defaults (McArthur et al., 2015). In this work, we explore the
biased representations that people with disabilities may experience on avatar
platforms.

Finally, Crenshaw’s concept of intersectionality theorizes that people’s
different identities intersect and result in unique consequences (Crenshaw,
1990). This concept might lead to unique ways of presenting
identities—especially disability, ethnicity, race, and gender—in an avatar
(Edwards et al., 2020). In this work, we specifically recruited people with
diverse identities to understand the unique needs of disabled people of color
and queer disabled people.

####  2.3.3. Disability Identity Representation in Avatars

There are a few avatar platforms that provide positive examples of identity
representation in avatars. For example, concerning disability, Overwatch has
several characters that use prosthetics, as well as an older adult woman of
color with only one eye and another who is neurodiverse. The community
response to these characters was largely positive (Cullen et al., 2018),
highlighting the meaningfulness of representation in video games. A few social
apps also provide assistive technology representation in their avatars. For
example, Meta avatars, Memojis, and Bitmojis each allow users to show a
hearing aid or cochlear implant (Zhang et al., 2022) on the avatar, while Meta
and Bitmoji also support wheelchairs in their avatar stickers.

Disability representation, especially outside of video games, is conspicuously
absent from existing literature (Mott et al., 2019). One exception is Zhang et
al.’s work, which focuses on how and why BLV and DHH people represent their
disabilities in VR spaces (Zhang et al., 2022). They found that many people
use assistive technologies to visually signify their disabilities in avatars.
While their participants often aimed to represent their physical selves,
sometimes they chose to omit their disability identity in certain contexts
(e.g., interacting with strangers) or because they wanted to show other parts
of their identity. We expand on these findings to consider other groups
commonly left out of accessibility work (e.g., people with neurodivergence,
mental illness, chronic illness) (Mack et al., 2021). Several of these
identities are considered “invisible disabilities,” which may have different
considerations for disability representation than prior work. We also discuss
both the accessibility barriers and affordances that avatars provide disabled
users.

##  3\. Methods

We conducted interviews with 18 people across 2 months. We recruited
participants on social media and via disability-focused email lists, using a
screening survey that included questions about their demographics, disability,
and avatar use.

###  3.1. Participants

Participants expressed interest in participating in the study by filling out a
screening form. In selecting participants, we first prioritized diversity in
disability, then in other demographics. Participants’ average age was 29.1
(SD=10.5), and 7 as men or trans masc, 6 participants identified as women, and
5 as nonbinary or agender. Concerning race, 9 participants identified as
White, 5 as Asian or South Asian, 4 as Black or African American, 2 as Latinx
or Hispanic, 1 as other, and 3 as multiple/mixed race. Our participants’
avatar platforms are shown in Figure 2.

We recruited broadly for people who identified as disabled, including
disabilities like blindness and motor impairments, while also intentionally
recruiting for other, often invisible or stigmatized conditions/identities,
such as people who identified as chronically ill, mentally ill/having mental
health conditions, and being neurodiverse.  People from these groups do
sometimes identify as disabled and often share similar experiences to people
who identify as disabled (e.g., neurodiversity (Chapman, 2020), chronic
illness (Wendell, 2001)). Additionally, two participants identified as being
fat, a dimension of identity that can also lead to similar experiences as
disabled people (Herndon, 2002; Kai-Cheong Chan and Gillick, 2009). Though not
all people who identify as fat identify as disabled (Kai-Cheong Chan and
Gillick, 2009), both of our fat participants identified as disabled, and one
of our fat participants explicitly commented that she wanted her fatness to be
considered, since it can be viewed as disabling under a social model of
disability. Given our focus on avatar representation for people minoritized
because of their bodies or minds, we decided all of these voices were in scope
for our work. Our participant sample included 6 people who are neurodiverse, 6
people with chronic illnesses, 4 DHH people, 4 people with mental illnesses, 3
people with mobility disabilities, 3 BLV people, 2 people who identify as
being fat, and 2 people with other disabilities; 10 out of 18 participants had
multiple disabilities/conditions.

Figure 2. The most used avatars were Bitmojis, video games generally, Memojis,
and Miis. Generally, people made avatars that represented themselves more in
video game than non-video game contexts.

A chart with the number of participants who used each avatar. 13 used Bitmoji,
13 used other video games, 12 used Memoji, 12 used Miis, 7 used Picrew, 6 used
Meta, 3 used Roblox, and 2 used Zepeto.

###  3.2. Procedure

Participants completed a 60-minute semi-structured video call interview and
were compensated with a $50 gift card or donation to charity.  Before the
interview, participants filled out a digital consent form to participate in
the study and have their interview recorded. At the start of the interview, we
reconfirmed consent to record and explained that participants could stop the
interview at any time and choose not to answer any questions. Following the
guidance of Mack et al. (Mack et al., 2022), we worked with each participant
to ensure the interview was accessible to them, for instance, by hiring
captioners, ensuring the interviewer’s face was clear for lip reading, and
sending questions ahead of time. We started the interview by defining
identity: “a person’s sense of self, established by their unique
characteristics, affiliations, and social roles.” Participants shared their
experience with disability and other relevant identities that might affect how
they represent themselves in avatars. We also showed screenshots of
participants’ avatars, and asked about their current avatar use, including how
and where they use the avatar, why they made the personalization choices they
did, and how the avatar does (or does not) reflect their identities. We then
asked questions about participants’ ideal avatar representation. Participants
indicated which avatar they felt represented them the best, explained why,
discussed how they would further change or improve the avatar, and how
contextual factors might influence their use of these avatars.

###  3.3. Analysis

We performed reflexive thematic analysis on the interview transcripts with our
research questions as guiding inquiries (Braun and Clarke, 2006, 2019). Our
process was inspired by that described by (Braun and Clarke, 2006), where the
first author reviewed all of the interviews while making an initial list of
codes, repeatedly referencing prior interviews as they developed and refined
new codes. Along the way, they created a codebook, which included codes for
interesting patterns/facets of the data. They shared the codebook with the
full research team, who provided comments based on their expertise in the
field and the subset of interview transcripts they had read, and the first
author refined the codebook accordingly. Some example codes include safety
concerns, showing the current level of ability with avatars, and the inability
to represent two identities at once. Once the codebook was finalized, we
verified its completeness by having another author apply the codes to a
transcript. The first author and this author discussed any differences in the
interpretation and application of codes. After iterating on the codebook based
on this discussion, the lead author applied the final set of codes to all
transcripts. The authors then summarized the codes into higher-level themes,
which are presented below. Example themes included contextual factors on
representation, methods of representing disability, and representing multiple,
fluctuating identities.

##  4\. Results

Participants used avatars from social platforms, video games, and avatar
websites (Figure 2). Most participants shared these avatars primarily with
family and friends, though a few people used them at work. Participants
described sharing their avatar with others, frequently as posed stickers with
text or props (see Figure 1), as well as for more persistent situations such
as one’s Zoom picture (P5). Across all contexts, participants enjoyed the
creativity, fun, and personalization of using avatars to express themselves.

In the following, we detail the key themes elicited by our analysis. First, we
describe when and why participants used avatars both as an accessible
communication method and to convey their disability identities. Then, we
explain how people portray their disabilities in avatars and their desires to
go beyond that representation. Finally, we illustrate how the norms of the
physical world and virtual spaces shape each other and affect avatar user
experiences.  To protect the identities of our participants, we created
similar avatars to the ones participants shared in screenshots to use in this
paper, changing non-critical elements.

###  4.1. How, When, and Why Disabled People Use Avatars to Signal Disability

Participants made and used avatars for three main reasons: 1) to represent
their identities, where participants had two, sometimes conflicting, goals of
accurately representing their identities and controlling how others see them
(Goffman, 1959); 2) to convey their fluctuating needs and identities, as
avatars have the unique ability to easily show changes to identities and
abilities; and 3) because avatars were a more accessible method of
communication as a fast, visual way to communicate without using many words.

####  4.1.1. People Incorporated Disability into Their Avatars to Show
Representation and Pride

Participants showed their minoritized identities to reinforce their pride and
embrace their authentic selves. P9 explained:

> “I spent so much time getting comfortable with who I am … I’m not interested
> in not being that in every space that I can as soon as possible.” —P9.

After dealing with internalized and externalized biases and stigma, P9 wanted
to demonstrate their hard-earned pride in all virtual spaces. Other times,
participants wanted to show their identity as a way to signal to other
disabled people that they can exist in certain spaces,  and show nondisabled
people that they have pride in their identities:

> “Yes. I’m proud to be a little person too, and I want other little people to
> know I’m a little person, so they know that they’re identified, that they’re
> represented, especially, since I have a more visible role … [it might] make
> it easier for people to imagine themselves accomplishing what they want to
> accomplish in their career,” —P5.

P5, and other participants like P3 and P6, expressed a desire to make others
feel less alone and more capable through representation.  Another way people
used avatars to change others’ perceptions of their identity was through
increased awareness and education:

> “I didn’t figure out my neurodivergencies [until I was] 40. Now I see it
> everywhere in so many people, but I spent so much of my life not
> understanding why I was so different from everybody … If there were a way to
> visually represent it … to help people understand that, that to me is
> important, representation is important,” —P10.

In a world that is starting to recognize more differences in human
functioning, people sharing their experience with neurodivergence and
disability helps others learn about topics that might apply to their own
lives.

####  4.1.2. People Shared Disability Identities in Avatars when They Felt
Safe

Most participants aimed to create realistic representations of themselves and
their disability identity. However, there were still times when people were
less likely to try to build disability into their avatar. First, safety was
paramount. Even participants with strong disability pride identified
situations where one cannot share an identity without fear of unfair treatment
or harm. P6 chose not to show disability when he didn’t “have the bandwidth to
deal with the pushback and toxicity that comes from online.”. Thus, people
with disabilities have to weigh the pros of authentic representation with the
cost of the hate they might receive.  For participants, these costs only
compounded when they had intersectional, minoritized identities (e.g., being
black or queer). Safety is always paramount in deciding how (or if) to reflect
a minoritized identity in virtual spaces.

####  4.1.3. People Made Trade-Offs around which Identities to Represent in
Avatars

Participants, who mostly had multiple, intersecting minoritized identities,
often described needing to make trade-offs between which identities they
represented, mainly due to the platforms they used. Each avatar platform has
different customization options which support different kinds of identity
expression, which meant participants could not always express their full
identities. P4 explained:

> “Because of some [platform] limitations I have to prioritize identities,
> because there aren’t as many options in a lot of cases, so I have to shuffle
> some things around. Like I have A and D but not this,” —P4

(a) A Bitmoji version of P8’s avatar that highlights her disability identity
as a person with Albinism, reflecting her physical world appearance.

(b) An Animal Crossing version of P8’s avatar that highlights her racial
identity as a person who is South Asian.

Figure 3. These two avatars both represent P8 but highlight different parts of
her identity. Her eyes remain a unifying purple in both.

Two avatars. The first is a woman with pale skin and very light blond hair and
purple eyes. The second is a woman with brown skin and black hair, and the
same purple eyes.

To P4, this meant selecting between their gender or disability identity
expression. Since they could only pick one identity to represent well, they
chose their gender expression, explaining that their disabilities are
primarily invisible and therefore a challenge to represent with current avatar
platforms. Similarly, P8, a South Asian person with albinism, chose to
represent her race more than her disability (see Figure 3):

> “I couldn’t present well enough [with avatars] to look albino, so I just
> made myself brown, and then I think I got fond of presenting as South Asian,
> so then I intentionally started doing it more,” —P8.

Because one of the prominent ways that albinism and South Asian heritage both
present themselves is skin and hair pigmentation, it was difficult for P8 to
show both at once. On some platforms (e.g., Bitmoji), P8 could reasonably
represent her albinism, while on others (e.g., Animal Crossing), none of the
options felt representative for her.

Since platforms do not consistently support all marginalized identities well,
poor representation is especially common when considering the
intersectionality of people’s minoritized identities: people with multiple
minoritized identities often have to sacrifice showing one identity to show
another more completely. Without a conscious effort to make sure that each of
these identities is represented well individually and when combined, platforms
risk further othering already minoritized groups.

####  4.1.4. People Wanted to Use Avatars to Convey Fluctuating Abilities

People with disabilities have fluctuating abilities and symptoms throughout
the day. Participants discussed that they wanted this variability reflected in
avatars:

> “None of us are static … that’s not my inner world experience all day, every
> day. If I actually want to be able to represent my disabilities, they aren’t
> static either…” —P10.

Many participants wanted to use avatars to convey their abilities and access
needs at a specific point in time. The symptoms and abilities that they wanted
to represent included pain, mobility, fatigue/energy, focus/attention, and
ability to communicate verbally. To show acute moments of things like fatigue
or inattention, some participants wanted to send their avatar with phrases
like “I have to go now,” or, “I’m no longer paying attention to you.” (P9).
Another commented,

> “I would have [one version of my avatar] for when I’m nonverbal, one for
> when I have a migraine, one for when I’m triggered and just need to
> withdraw,” —P10.

P1 and P10 specifically were interested in using phrases like “one spoon left”
or showing cartoon spoons. This phrase references Spoon Theory (Miserandino,
2003), which is a common way to express the inability to do things because of
symptoms in the chronically ill community. Other participants, like P9, were
interested in signaling their current capabilities, such as their energy
level, as an ongoing “status” with their avatar rather than specific moments
of distress. To convey status, P4 suggested adopting the traffic light system,
which is common within the Autistic community, where green indicates a higher
level of energy left for interacting with people and red indicates preferring
no interaction. Finally, several participants with fluctuating mobility wanted
to be able to convey their current ability level by showing the assistive
technology they are currently using (see Figure 4):

> “I could imagine indicating how mobile I was at any given time, by having
> the cane, or possibly using a wheelchair, or a scooter as those additional
> options to indicate where I am in that situation today,” —P9.

Interestingly, the ability to show access need fluctuation could also support
fluctuating gender identities, which was desired by P4, P6, P9, and P17. For
example, P4 appreciated the ability to make small tweaks to their avatar
(e.g., changing the broadness of shoulders or jaw shape) to best represent
their gender day-to-day in a video game that allowed them to easily switch
between avatars.

Using avatars to signal current abilities/symptoms via preset stickers or
persistent status indicators allowed participants an easy way to make the more
hidden, internal aspects of disability visible to those they communicate with.
This feature also benefits people with fluctuating gender identities in
choosing how they present to other people, which is especially helpful to
disabled, gender-queer people.

####  4.1.5. People Shared Avatars as a Personal, Nonverbal Communication
Method

Several participants described instances where communicating with avatars led
to more accessible conversations. For example, one participant with an
intellectual or developmental disability and two who are neurodiverse found
that there were times when sharing visual avatars was significantly less
taxing than putting together sentences (e.g., when they were nonverbal). For
P10, their dyslexia motivated their preference for avatar-based communication:

> “It was just easier to communicate … not having to use letters and words and
> not having to engage that part of my brain when my dyslexic brain is
> exhausted … Also, I cannot tell you how many times I still get people
> correcting my grammar … They’re just shaming [me]. To not have to use
> letters to convey a message is brilliant,” —P10.

P10 was able to avoid situations that often led to judgment or stigma related
to their disability by sending avatars with preset phrases rather than typing
out messages. In both cases, sending avatars with preset messages was more
accessible.

Another deaf participant found communicating orally to be challenging at
times, so he started using his avatars in work contexts:

> “I use it a lot in relating with my customers … in the chat. I would just
> send them an avatar to show. I feel it’s more [expressive] since I really
> can’t hear. The avatar helps paint my mood,” —P13.

In text mediums, nonverbal signals like tone and facial expressions are easily
lost (Kiesler et al., 1984). Avatars allowed P13 to be more personal while
remaining in an accessible text medium.

Regardless of whether their disability was represented in their avatar,
participants with various disabilities found that the medium of avatars, due
to their pictorial nature, could be more accessible than alternatives.

(a) An avatar that signals the need to use a cane for mobility at a given
time.

(b) An avatar that signals the need to use a wheelchair for mobility at a
given time.

Figure 4. These avatars show how one might signal their mobility needs in
their avatar via the assistive technology they use.

Two pictures of the same avatar, a queer presenting person with brown skin and
hair with a blue crop top and black leggings. In the first, they are strutting
with sunglasses and a cane. In the second, they have a wheelchair with an
inquisitive expression on their face.

###  4.2. Portraying Disability in Avatars

Participants were usually very intentional in creating their avatars, whether
that meant highlighting their disabilities or obscuring them.  In cases where
participants were able to focus on self-expression over impression management,
they described the ideal ways they would like to share their disabilities. We
describe how participants use current features of avatar platforms to show
disability identities and how they would like avatar platforms to better
support their identity expression.

####  4.2.1. Current Use: Showing Assistive Technology and the Full Body

Many participants showed their disabilities in avatars through their assistive
technologies and how they posed their bodies. Assistive technologies can
become an intimate part of their identity, especially when they are prominent
in their life:

> “When people think of me, they think of my wheelchair, my scooter, me, and
> my service dog [name], because she goes everywhere I go,” —P5.

With current avatar platforms, this type of identity expression is most often
only available for hearing aids or mobility aids, and several participants
wanted more variety in the assistive technologies supported. The other main
strategy that helped participants feel represented was posing their avatar in
ways that showed their whole bodies, rather than just above their shoulders,
though this is not a common option in many avatar platforms (Zhang et al.,
2022). Showing the full body allowed access tools like compression socks (P17)
or a wheelchair (P6), or a person’s fatness to become visible. In general,
participants were interested in selecting poses for their avatars that
communicated their disability.

However, outside of these two cases, participants found that platforms did not
support the variety of ways they could imagine representing their disabilities
in avatars. Their ideas mainly fell into four different dimensions of avatars:
(1) body modifications, (2) assistive technologies, (3) symbols, and (4)
backgrounds and actions.

####  4.2.2. Desired Use: Modifying Parts of the Avatar Body to Show
Disability

Users can often customize the physical characteristics of the body, including
body shape/type, skin tone, facial features, hairstyle, and hair color.
Participants expressed interest in being able to customize avatar body
proportions to better represent their disability identities. For example, the
ability to customize limb length would allow better representation of people
with dwarfism, certain muscular conditions, and amputees. In the same vein,
participants who identified as fat commented that, when adjusting fatness is
an option, it is often poorly implemented:

> “The ones that [show fatness] are typically terrible … I think one of the
> really beautiful things about fatness is that it’s extremely diverse. Fat
> does not sit on two people’s bodies the same way … it would just be amazing
> to have something where you could actually change the proportions of the
> body,” —P3.

P3’s comment suggests that customizing the amount of fat on different body
parts would allow her to feel better represented. While this customization is
highly important for people who consider fatness and disability core part(s)
of their identity, it also better represents any person who aims to best match
their physical appearance and whose body type does not conform to the most
commonly represented thin body with four limbs.

Further, two participants commented that exact skin tone was critical to
representing their disabled selves. P18 sees their pale complexion as an
important indicator of their disability, since their chronic illness symptoms
require them to stay inside frequently. Additionally, they wanted more fine-
grained customization around being able to show dark skin under their eyes, a
consequence of their chronic illness. Similarly, P8 has albinism and her pale
skin is a key representation of her identity. However, it can be difficult to
find the correct skin tone: she often could not find her pale skin tone rather
than one that is “paper-white.”

####  4.2.3. Desired Use: Representing a Broad Variety of Customizable
Assistive Technologies

Our participants often had the goal of matching their actual physical
appearance as much as possible, and without the ability to represent their
assistive technology, a core part of their appearance is omitted in avatars.
However, participants cautioned that, to be done well, key aspects of virtual
assistive technologies must match their real-life counterparts. For example,
some people customize their assistive technologies in real life as a fun form
of expression; P5 had a collection of colorful canes, and P12 described people
selecting colorful ear molds for hearing aids.  While most participants did
not use platforms that support this customization, P6 appreciated a platform
that allowed him to customize the appearance of the wheelchair to be rainbow-
colored such that he could show both his disability and queer pride. On the
other hand, P5 and P6 were put off when assistive technologies in virtual
spaces were incorrectly designed:

> “Whenever somebody is posed in a [wheel]chair and [the wheelchair] doesn’t
> fit them, it just does not look right at all and that is so distracting.
> It’s like, what if an avatar had on clothes that were too short or too big?”
> —P5.

Details like color and the fit of the technology to the person matter. P6
further highlighted that, in order to properly represent assistive technology,
designers should work with disabled people and communities in the design
process.

####  4.2.4. Desired Use: Adding Symbols to Share Disabled Experiences

Adding symbols to the avatar, especially words and objects, is a powerful tool
that participants wanted to use to convey their disabled experiences and share
disability culture (see Figure 1). For example, P10 wanted to show words in
Bionic, a dyslexia-friendly font. P9 wanted to share that they had ADHD and
were interested in leaning into existing stereotypes to share common phrases
that demonstrate their experience, like looking away from a person and saying
“squirrel.”111Note that while some people embrace this stereotype, others find
it harmful or offensive (Hey, 2019).

Symbols were particularly helpful for people with invisible disabilities and
symptoms. P15 wanted to be able to add a symbol or flag222The disability pride
flag, to our knowledge, is not represented in any of the most used platforms
by our participants as an annotation to the side of the avatar to represent
his invisible disability, similar to queer pride symbols. P10 wanted the
ability to put little pins and needles poking into all parts of their body at
once to signify how it feels to have certain types of chronic pain. P10 also
saw an opportunity to play with the cartoon avatar’s appearance to better
represent how people are feeling on the inside:

> “People, once they are pregnant, their feet grow and other parts of their
> body don’t work the same way that they used to. Being able to represent that
> your feet are absolutely just destroyed today, by enlarging them and making
> them red is a way of helping people decide for themselves what visibility
> looks like for their disability.” —P10.

P1 suggested using word annotations to incorporate disability culture into
avatars in existing poses. She explained that most of the “tired” stickers
reflect how she feels reasonably well, but that she would use those stickers
more if they had a phrase like “no spoons.” Symbols allowed participants to
add bits of their disability or culture to their avatars.

####  4.2.5. Desired Use: Selecting Actions and Backgrounds that Represent
Disability Culture or Experience

Participants also wanted to use an avatar’s action and location to convey
their disabled experience. For example, P7, P12, and P13, all of whom are
d/Deaf, wanted avatar platforms to support short signed phrases in American
Sign Language (ASL) as preset animations, or even allow the user to animate
their avatar by recording themselves signing longer thoughts. For another
participant, actions could allow them to represent their neurodiversity by
showing a person “flapping,” which is a common stimming333Stimming is
repetitive behaviors done as a form of self-stimulation or self-soothing.
behavior for some neurodiverse people (P4). Finally, people commented that
avatars’ backgrounds can provide further context into a disabled person’s
experience. P1 wanted her avatar to be shown in a bedroom because she is a
self-described “sleepy person” in part because of how her disabilities
manifest in her life, and P9 wanted to be shown with a slightly cluttered
environment with whiteboards everywhere since they have ADHD and utilize
distributed whiteboards to remember things. These examples show the creative
potential that the avatar’s action and location have to represent disability
for a diverse range of people.

###  4.3. Avatar Platforms and Physical World Social Norms Shape Each Other

Without care, avatar platforms can easily encode the biases of the physical
world, leading minoritized users to purposefully craft their avatars in ways
that counteract stereotypes. However, we also saw cases where participants’
positive representation in avatars led to positive responses in the physical
world.

####  4.3.1. Options and Defaults in Avatar Platforms can Perpetuate Physical
World Biases

Avatar systems take on and create platform norms that are informed by broader
social context. Platforms determine who does and does not get to exist in the
virtual space through the options they provide for people to represent
themselves. Consequently, avatar platforms can replicate social biases through
the options they surface to users. Determining which features of an avatar are
editable and which are not limits who can be represented in a system. P3
explains:

> “A lot of avatar makers, when they’re representing body size they’ll like,
> ‘go for height,’ they’re fine with height diversity but then they’ll give
> you a very narrow range for fatness. I often feel it’s like the subtext is
> who would pick to be fat? It’s like, ‘When you’re not giving me the option
> to do that, you’re reinforcing that I shouldn’t choose it.”’ —P3.

In this case, the omission of fatness as an option not only frustrates P3, as
she cannot fully represent how she appears in the physical world, but also
perpetuates biases in broader society around fatness as undesirable (Kyrölä,
2021).

Relatedly, having some options as “defaults” versus add-ons affects who feels
like they belong on a platform. Two participants explained that there were
better body or hair options to represent themselves and their identity, but
they had to be purchased or unlocked. For example, platinum blonde hairstyles
(which are closer to P8’s hair color) were costly upgrades from the “standard”
hair colors in the game Animal Crossing. In addition to leaving players
frustrated with an unrepresentative avatar, this experience actually deterred
P8 from attempting to make a visually realistic representation of herself.
Locking certain customization features behind paywalls can thus imply who can
exist easily or “by default,” and who must incur more friction (e.g., monetary
cost, time, effort) to exist in a virtual world.

Finally, blatantly harmful stigmas from the physical world can be built into
platforms. For example, P10 commented on how mental illness is represented in
the video game series The Sims. Sims avatars can have personality
characteristics, and the only one that comes close to mental illness is
“insane.” P10 explains their frustration:

> “How that is represented in that game is somebody who is angry, erratic,
> emotional. It’s basically every negative trope about having a mental health
> diagnosis or disability. It’s [the] only … [disability] representation that
> you get and it’s that word,” —P10.

While disability representation matters in avatars and games, this example
demonstrates that something is not always better than nothing: careless
representations of disability in avatars propagate harmful stereotypes.

####  4.3.2. Stereotypes and Stigma in the Physical World Affect Avatar
Expression

Since avatars have the ability to perpetuate stereotypes, participants were
conscious of avoiding stereotypes in their own representations. P6 expressed
his frustration with stock photos of wheelchair users perpetuating stereotypes
about their abilities:

> “A lot of times it’s like someone sitting still, or even someone being
> pushed by someone else. [I want] options to emphasize like, “Yes, this is a
> person who can, in fact, move in a wheelchair,” ” —P6.

Similarly, both of our blind participants and one of our participants who uses
a wheelchair wanted to show their avatars doing specific activities to combat
the stereotype that disabled people sit around or cannot have active
lifestyles. P8 would sometimes intentionally change her skin tone to have more
pigmentation than she has in real life to match her South Asian heritage:

> “I think it’s because I don’t get the chance to make first impressions in
> real life … They look at my last name … and I have to explain it, and I have
> to sometimes prove [my ethnicity] to them for some reason. I’ll speak my
> mother’s tongue … If I’m playing with strangers, and they don’t know that I
> have albinism, I can just pretend to look like who I am on the inside, and
> they wouldn’t know. I still get to have that experience where people, by
> default, if they look at my little character, they’re like, ‘Okay it’s a
> brown girl.’ I’m changing their stereotypes of me on purpose,” —P8.

In this example, P8 utilized the ability to adjust her skin tone to be
different than it is in reality, to reflect an authentic part of herself that
isn’t always visible (i.e., her South Asian heritage). Through this process
and the level of appearance customization that avatars support, she can
control the stereotypes that she might encounter when interacting with others.

####  4.3.3. Avatars can Shape Physical World Norms and Feelings about
Disability Identity

At the same time, avatars have the ability to influence the physical world.
Participants commented on ways that their disabilities being represented
virtually led to physical world gains. For example, virtual representation
emboldened some participants to feel and/or express more pride in their
disability. P3 spoke about how she shows stigmatized elements of her identity
in avatars as an act of reclamation:

> “It’s nice to be able to incorporate things about your body that have been
> stigmatized that you have become more comfortable with as a way to take away
> the stigma,” —P3.

In one example, P18 felt stigma around his hearing aids and chose not to
include them in his avatar. However, once hearing aids in avatars were adopted
broadly, this reduced the stigma to the point that P18 added hearing aids to
his avatar. Some participants represented their disabilities in their avatars
to combat stigmas and eliminate them in both virtual and real spaces.

In each of these examples, we see that representation in avatars can have
real, positive effects on the user who wants to feel better represented.

####  4.3.4. Excluding People is Harmful to Users and Platforms

When platforms do not actively choose inclusive avatar designs, the resulting
exclusion has negative effects for the user and the platform. For example, P3
explained how disengaged she felt when playing fitness games that allowed for
only thin avatars: “My body is the one doing the work here. It is actually a
fat person doing this.” Some participants commented that they could not use
noninclusive technologies, especially on days they already feel sensitive:

> “I definitely think that the avatars creation is not something I would do on
> like [a] ‘Bad Body Day’. If I am hearing the siren song of fitness one day,
> that’s not a time to go and make an avatar. It’s a recipe for feeling shitty
> about myself,” —P3.

This example shows that avatars that do not look like users, but rather what
the norms in our society say they should “want” to look like, can negatively
impact people’s body image or mental health. Other participants fully eschewed
technologies that were inaccessible (e.g., P0 does not use avatars much
because he uses a screen reader and so few avatars have alt text) or non-
representative (e.g., P9 refuses to make a Meta avatar because they cannot be
shown as fat enough). These examples demonstrate that poor representation in
avatars does not just have negative effects for the user; it actively loses
platforms users.

##  5\. Discussion

Our data provides insights into how people with disabilities want to use
avatars and represent their disability and other important identities. Our
participants largely spoke of using avatars in social applications where,
similar to findings from prior work (Zhang et al., 2022; Freeman and Maloney,
2021), they aimed to make realistic, or slightly more idealized avatars
(Turkle, 1994; Neustaedter and Fedorovskaya, 2009). Aligned with research on
gender and racial stereotypes in avatars (McArthur and Jenson, 2014; Consalvo,
2003; McArthur et al., 2015), their experiences demonstrate that they often
encounter stereotypes about their disability when crafting their avatars and
have to make very conscious decisions to avoid them. Our participants
frequently chose to disclose their disability in their avatar to show
representation to others, show pride, and authentically express themselves
(Zhang et al., 2022). Moving beyond prior work, we found that participants
wanted to harness avatars to communicate about their disabled experience and
to communicate in more accessible ways than they could otherwise.
Specifically, while prior work focuses on BLV and DHH participants (Zhang et
al., 2022), our work with a considerable number of neurodiverse, chronically
ill, and mentally ill participants provides insights into how a broader set of
disabled people want to be represented, especially those with invisible
disabilities. We now discuss how avatars can best represent disabled and
intersectional identities, how to support signaling group identity membership
in avatars, and design recommendations for avatar platform makers.

###  5.1. Representing Intersectional, Fluctuating Identities

Audre Lorde and Sins Invalid emphasize the importance of the fact that
disabled people “do not live single issue lives,” but rather ones with complex
intersecting facets of identity (Lorde, 1982; Invalid, 2019). Building on
research that discusses the importance of examining multiple identities
(Bennett et al., 2021; Abebe et al., 2022) and dimensions of identity
individually (McArthur et al., 2015; Zhang et al., 2022), we present the
unique issues that arise for these people in avatar representation.
Specifically, findings from our sample of almost exclusively multiply
minoritized people emphasize the importance of understanding intersectional
issues, especially in the space of identity representation. Avatar platforms
that did not support minoritized people well-created issues around what
identities to show, forcing participants to choose between their identities,
or what platforms to use. These issues led participants to avoid platforms on
which they could not show certain identities.

However, if platforms did support diverse representation, avatars were a
useful tool for participants that could act as filters: morphing appearances
to occlude some identities while bringing others to the forefront. We
highlight three features of avatars that are key in supporting disabled
people’s desired identity presentation.

First, avatars can be hyper-customizable, which allows people to be
intentional in how they craft their appearance to show their identities. We
extend prior work on customization options for race and gender (Morgan et al.,
2020; McArthur et al., 2015; McArthur and Jenson, 2014), and disability
disclosure for BLV and DHH people in VR (Zhang et al., 2022), by demonstrating
how avatars could represent invisible disabilities and elucidate access needs.
This can cross many different characteristics of avatars, from skin tone and
bruising, to poses, to assistive technology use—with some individual features
being able to support multiple identities at once (e.g., a rainbow wheelchair
showing both disability identity and queer pride).

Second, avatars’ ability to deviate from reality allowed people to better
represent or hide aspects of their identity. While prior work discusses
switching identities to control how others perceive them (DiMicco and Millen,
2007; Turkle, 1999; Bruckman, 1996; Haimson and Hoffmann, 2016; Edwards et
al., 2020; Zhang et al., 2022), our work highlights how these choices might
not always be unconstrained; some identities can be difficult to express at
the same time (e.g., P8 drastically altering skin tone to switch between her
race and disability identities), and others are not supported by avatar
platforms. With the public’s oftentimes stigmatized view of disability, people
with disabilities have to be particularly selective in whether and when to
show an identity. Sometimes, participants wanted to express pride in their
disability identity (e.g., demonstrating disability representation to younger
colleagues) but wanted to obscure it completely when they felt unsafe (e.g.,
hiding disability in online forums). As such, participants needed to balance
which identities to present in their avatars, “editing oneself” (Bullingham
and Vasconcelos, 2013) depending on goals of authentically expressing
themselves and/or influencing the impression they want to give off in certain
situations.

Finally, the ability to easily update avatars is critical for bringing
different identities to the forefront or background depending on how they want
others to perceive them. This was a critical feature for sharing nuances of
disability like a person’s current abilities or access needs (e.g., showing
mobility based on the avatar’s pose or assistive technology). Indeed, each of
these three features can support both disability identity and presenting
multiple, intersecting identities.

####  5.1.1. Future Considerations

Many of the ways people want to use avatars to better represent identity rely
on the ability to easily make changes that persist for different lengths of
time. Some changes might span days or months, while others might be only
needed for one message. For example, someone who wants to send a message to a
friend showing how tired they are might only make a small change like adding
the words “no spoons left” or a red light to their avatar. They might not want
this small annotation to their avatar to persist after this message is sent,
since it represents something that changes frequently. More long-lasting or
significant changes (e.g., changing gender expression or dying hair) might
require updating the avatar at its base rather than using annotations.
Enabling users to modify their avatars at different time scales—perhaps
through saved configurations that users can swipe between—is key to making it
easier for them to express their identities.  Future research can consider how
to make the process of creating and selecting the most applicable, highly-
customized avatars as easy as possible (e.g., can we use sensing differences
in ability, like gait, to predict what kind of assistive technology the user
will want the avatar to use, like a cane).

###  5.2. Intentional Community Signaling in Avatars

People were very intentional in how they presented or wanted to present their
identities to signal belonging to a certain community. To do so, they
sometimes referenced community cultures. Queer people incorporated the
established flag colors into their avatars, and chronically ill participants
wanted to reference “Spoon Theory” by adding cartoon representations of spoons
(Miserandino, 2003). In addition to signaling identity with one community,
participants also were conscious about not propagating stereotypes that they
found harmful about their identity. For example, blind participants actively
tried to show themselves being active to combat inaccurate stereotypes about
their lives.

To support community-based identity expression, platforms need to consider how
to facilitate in-group signaling while avoiding problematic or offensive
representations. This problem is nontrivial given that what people find
representative of their identity varies and conflicts between groups; even in
our sample, a stereotype for one group was the ideal representation for
another. For instance, while blind participants wanted more active avatars to
combat stereotypes, people who were chronically ill were frustrated by the
large number of active avatars, and wanted more options for low-intensity
activities and poses (e.g., lying down, reading a book). The same issue can
arise within a specific community; a mode of signaling might be fun for one
person but offensive to another. Though P9 wanted a playful representation of
themselves saying “squirrel,” which is commonly associated with “ADHD,” others
within the ADHD community find that stereotype offensive and incorrect (Hey,
2019).

To address these issues, platforms should consider when it is appropriate to
pre-label something as “an option for people of this identity” (e.g.,
chronically ill content). Content created and branded as supporting people of
a specific identity can be a powerful way to help users feel seen. It can also
be an access benefit because it saves the user the time and effort of finding
or making the content (Zhang et al., 2022). At the same time, labeling content
as being “for a certain group of people” risks offending people who disagree
with that label. Certain strategies could mitigate these negative aspects of
creating curated identity-based content. First, platforms should consider
surveying a broad group of people within the corresponding community about
potentially sensitive content. Disabled communities hold the expertise to
identify desirable content versus potentially harmful or offensive. Second,
platforms can allow people to make their own presets or curated content. While
this option does not solve the challenges that minoritized people might face
in their initial search for content, people can still benefit from fast, easy
access to the identity-expressing and affirming content they find.

###  5.3. Recommendations for Avatar Platforms

From these findings, we present a list of considerations for avatar platforms
around disability representation:

  1. (1)

Support customizability and easy change

    1. (a)

Allow customization of body part sizes: notably, allowing users to change the
way weight sits on the body, and the length/presence of limbs is important for
disabled and fat representation.

    2. (b)

Provide default poses that show more than the head: many aspects of
disability, such as assistive technology use and body size, are most visible
from the neck down.

    3. (c)

Allow color pickers wherever possible: participants felt limited and
frustrated in selecting their skin and hair color from a limited palette.
Sometimes colors of other elements, like assistive technology, were important
for people’s self-expression.

    4. (d)

Allow users to make multiple, saved versions of avatars: participants wanted
different versions of avatars that expressed different states of disability
(e.g., symptoms, assistive technology use), or may or may not present
disability. Switching between versions also must be easy to allow for seamless
identity representation in different contexts.

  2. (2)

Make disabled and multiply minoritized users feel welcomed

    1. (a)

Do not block identity representation with paywalls: do not require users to
pay for features that are important for representing a core identity (e.g.,
hairstyles, skin tones, assistive devices)

    2. (b)

Make avatars accessible to create and consume: this includes making sure
avatars have alt text, the associated text has proper color contrast, and that
avatars can be created and consumed with only keyboard access.

    3. (c)

Ensure features can be combined seamlessly: for example, check that people
with a variety of body types still look realistic when posed in a wheelchair.
Check that assistive devices look natural on people with a variety of skin
tones. This is especially important for multiple minoritized avatar users.

  3. (3)

Engage with disabled communities

    1. (a)

Work with disabled people: disabled communities can help with concretizing
designs for showing disability in avatars (e.g., assistive technology).

    2. (b)

Avoid perpetuating harmful stereotypical representations: talking with
disabled communities can help avoid these pitfalls.

Designing avatar platforms such that they are inclusive of all types of
identity is a challenging issue. Our design recommendations are starting
guidelines, and should be considered in tandem with feedback from disabled
communities. We encourage designers to consider how avatar platforms can
maintain or enhance the key functionality of avatars in supporting
intersectional, fluctuating identities and community signaling.

##  6\. Limitations

While our interviews and findings revealed deep, rich examples of people’s
experiences and perceptions of disability representation in avatars, our work
also has some limitations. For example, our sample was self-selected, and thus
skews towards people who are younger and people with strong disability
identities and pride. This is an important group to represent, as they likely
have strong opinions on how they want their identities represented. However,
future work could build on our results with broader-scale surveys of more
people with various perceptions of their disability identity, while also
allowing for greater disability and geographic diversity. Surveying a broader
sample is an important follow up, as our sample of 18 participants is not
fully representative of any one disabled community, as is participatory work
to understand the specific execution of our guidelines on platforms. Further,
our discussions with interviewees mainly focused on avatars in non-mixed
reality social media/social app contexts. Some of our insights likely extend
to mixed reality contexts and video games, though they may require more
specific needs and considerations for the avatars they provide.

##  7\. Conclusion

Because avatars are representations of ourselves in virtual spaces, it is
critical that core parts of identity, like disability, can be shown in this
medium. We interviewed 18 people with disabilities or related identities about
their preferences in representing their disability identities and using
avatars. Participants described creative ways they can use many dimensions of
avatars to convey their disability status and experience, including body
modifications, poses, symbols, and actions and backgrounds. Overall,
participants wanted to share their disability identities and experiences,
oftentimes using avatars to signal their abilities, symptoms, or disability
pride. However, participants had to feel safe to do so and supported by
platforms in expressing their identities. If participants had multiple
minoritized identities, avatars uniquely enabled them to choose which to
highlight to others, but also required trade-offs since most platforms did not
support all of their identities well. Finally, we discussed how avatars’
flexibility, ease of use, and ability to bend reality were helpful in
representing disability, especially for people with fluctuating abilities and
identities. We summarize our insights into design recommendations for future
researchers and designers to build avatar platforms with disability (and other
minoritized) representation in mind.

###### Acknowledgements.

We would like to thank all of our participants and Maarten Bos for their time
and insights.

## References

  * (1)
  * Abebe et al. (2022) Veronica Abebe, Gagik Amaryan, Marina Beshai, Ali Ekin Gurgen, Wendy Ho, Naaji R Hylton, Daniel Kim, Christy Lee, Carina Lewandowski, Katherine T Miller, et al. 2022\.  Anti-Racist HCI: notes on an emerging critical technical practice. In _CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems Extended Abstracts_. 1–12.
  * Arts (2014) Electronic Arts. 2014\.  The Sims 4.
  * Bailey et al. (2009) Rachel Bailey, Kevin Wise, and Paul Bolls. 2009.  How avatar customizability affects children’s arousal and subjective presence during junk food–sponsored online video games.  _CyberPsychology & Behavior_ 12, 3 (2009), 277–283.
  * Barnes (2019) Colin Barnes. 2019\.  Understanding the social model of disability: Past, present and future.  In _Routledge handbook of disability studies_. Routledge, 14–31.
  * Bennett et al. (2021) Cynthia L Bennett, Cole Gleason, Morgan Klaus Scheuerman, Jeffrey P Bigham, Anhong Guo, and Alexandra To. 2021.  “It’s Complicated”: Negotiating Accessibility and (Mis) Representation in Image Descriptions of Race, Gender, and Disability. In _Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems_. 1–19.
  * Braun and Clarke (2006) Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2006.  Using thematic analysis in psychology.  _Qualitative research in psychology_ 3, 2 (2006), 77–101.
  * Braun and Clarke (2019) Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2019.  Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis.  _Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health_ 11, 4 (2019), 589–597.
  * Bruckman (1996) Amy Bruckman. 1996\.  Gender swapping on the Internet.  _High noon on the electronic frontier: Conceptual issues in cyberspace_ (1996), 317–326.
  * Bullingham and Vasconcelos (2013) Liam Bullingham and Ana C Vasconcelos. 2013.  ‘The presentation of self in the online world’: Goffman and the study of online identities.  _Journal of information science_ 39, 1 (2013), 101–112.
  * Chapman (2020) Robert Chapman. 2020\.  Neurodiversity, disability, wellbeing.  In _Neurodiversity Studies_. Routledge, 57–72.
  * Cobley (2018) David Cobley. 2018\.  Understanding, defining and measuring disability.  In _Disability and International Development_. Routledge, 8–28.
  * Consalvo (2003) Mia Consalvo. 2003\.  _It’s a queer world after all: Studying The Sims and sexuality_.  Glaad.
  * Crenshaw (1990) Kimberle Crenshaw. 1990\.  Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color.  _Stan. L. Rev._ 43 (1990), 1241.
  * Cullen et al. (2018) Amanda Cullen, Kathryn Ringland, and Christine Wolf. 2018\.  A better world: examples of disability in Overwatch.  _First Person Scholar_ 28 (2018), 2018.
  * Davis and Stanovsek (2021) Donna Z Davis and Shelby Stanovsek. 2021.  The machine as an extension of the body: When identity, immersion, and interactive design serve as both resource and limitation for the disabled.  _Human-Machine Communication_ 2 (2021), 121–135.
  * DiMicco and Millen (2007) Joan Morris DiMicco and David R Millen. 2007.  Identity management: multiple presentations of self in facebook. In _Proceedings of the 2007 international ACM conference on Supporting group work_. 383–386.
  * Edwards et al. (2020) Emory James Edwards, Cella Monet Sum, and Stacy M Branham. 2020\.  Three tensions between personas and complex disability identities. In _Extended abstracts of the 2020 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems_. 1–9.
  * Freeman and Maloney (2021) Guo Freeman and Divine Maloney. 2021.  Body, avatar, and me: The presentation and perception of self in social virtual reality.  _Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction_ 4, CSCW3 (2021), 1–27.
  * Games (2013) Rockstar Games. 2013\.  Grand Theft Auto V.
  * Gerling et al. (2016) Kathrin Gerling, Kieran Hicks, Michael Kalyn, Adam Evans, and Conor Linehan. 2016.  Designing movement-based play with young people using powered wheelchairs. In _Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems_. 4447–4458.
  * Goering (2015) Sara Goering. 2015\.  Rethinking disability: the social model of disability and chronic disease.  _Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine_ 8, 2 (2015), 134–138.
  * Goffman (1959) Erving Goffman. 1959\.  _The presentation of self in everyday life_.  Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing group.
  * Haimson and Hoffmann (2016) Oliver L Haimson and Anna Lauren Hoffmann. 2016.  Constructing and enforcing” authentic” identity online: Facebook, real names, and non-normative identities.  _First Monday_ (2016).
  * Herndon (2002) April Herndon. 2002\.  Disparate but disabled: Fat embodiment and disability studies.  _Nwsa Journal_ (2002), 120–137.
  * Hey (2019) Alex Hey. 2019.  _Is the ”SQUIRREL!” Stereotype True?_ https://www.resetadhd.com/blog/squirrel-adhd-stereotype
  * Higgin (2009) Tanner Higgin. 2009\.  Blackless fantasy: The disappearance of race in massively multiplayer online role-playing games.  _Games and Culture_ 4, 1 (2009), 3–26.
  * Invalid (2019) Sins Invalid. 2019\.  _Skin Tooth and Bone: The Basis of Movement is Our People, a Disability Justice Primer_ (2nd ed.).  Sins Invalid.
  * James Edwards et al. (2021) Emory James Edwards, Kyle Lewis Polster, Isabel Tuason, Emily Blank, Michael Gilbert, and Stacy Branham. 2021.  ”That’s in the eye of the beholder”: Layers of Interpretation in Image Descriptions for Fictional Representations of People with Disabilities. In _The 23rd International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility_. 1–14.
  * Jin (2009) Seung-A Annie Jin. 2009\.  Avatars mirroring the actual self versus projecting the ideal self: The effects of self-priming on interactivity and immersion in an exergame, Wii Fit.  _CyberPsychology & Behavior_ 12, 6 (2009), 761–765.
  * Jin and Park (2009) Seung-A Annie Jin and Namkee Park. 2009.  Parasocial interaction with my avatar: Effects of interdependent self-construal and the mediating role of self-presence in an avatar-based console game, Wii.  _CyberPsychology & Behavior_ 12, 6 (2009), 723–727.
  * Kafai et al. (2010a) Yasmin B Kafai, Melissa S Cook, and Deborah A Fields. 2010a.  “Blacks Deserve Bodies Too!”: Design and Discussion About Diversity and Race in a Tween Virtual World.  _Games and Culture_ 5, 1 (2010), 43–63.
  * Kafai et al. (2010b) Yasmin B Kafai, Deborah A Fields, and Melissa S Cook. 2010b.  Your second selves: Player-designed avatars.  _Games and culture_ 5, 1 (2010), 23–42.
  * Kai-Cheong Chan and Gillick (2009) Nathan Kai-Cheong Chan and Allison C Gillick. 2009.  Fatness as a disability: questions of personal and group identity.  _Disability & Society_ 24, 2 (2009), 231–243.
  * Kiesler et al. (1984) Sara Kiesler, Jane Siegel, and Timothy W McGuire. 1984\.  Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication.  _American psychologist_ 39, 10 (1984), 1123.
  * Kyrölä (2021) Katariina Kyrölä. 2021\.  Fat in the Media.  In _The Routledge International Handbook of Fat Studies_. Routledge, 105–116.
  * Leonard (2006) David J Leonard. 2006\.  Not a hater, just keepin’it real: The importance of race-and gender-based game studies.  _Games and culture_ 1, 1 (2006), 83–88.
  * Lorde (1982) Audre Lorde. 1982\.  Learning from the 60s.  _Sister outsider: Essays and speeches_ 13444 (1982).
  * Mack et al. (2021) Kelly Mack, Emma McDonnell, Dhruv Jain, Lucy Lu Wang, Jon E. Froehlich, and Leah Findlater. 2021\.  What do we mean by “accessibility research”? A literature survey of accessibility papers in CHI and ASSETS from 1994 to 2019\. In _Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems_. 1–18.
  * Mack et al. (2022) Kelly Mack, Emma McDonnell, Venkatesh Potluri, Maggie Xu, Jailyn Zabala, Jeffrey Bigham, Jennifer Mankoff, and Cynthia Bennett. 2022\.  Anticipate and Adjust: Cultivating Access in Human-Centered Methods. In _CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems_. 1–18.
  * McArthur and Jenson (2014) Victoria McArthur and Jennifer Jenson. 2014.  E is for everyone? Best practices for the socially inclusive design of avatar creation interfaces. In _Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Interactive Entertainment_. 1–8.
  * McArthur et al. (2015) Victoria McArthur, Robert John Teather, and Jennifer Jenson. 2015.  The avatar affordances framework: mapping affordances and design trends in character creation interfaces. In _Proceedings of the 2015 annual symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play_. 231–240.
  * Miserandino (2003) Christine Miserandino. 2003\.  _The Spoon Theory written by Christine Miserandino_.  https://butyoudontlooksick.com/articles/written-by-christine/the-spoon-theory/
  * Morgan et al. (2020) Helen Morgan, Amanda O’donovan, Renita Almeida, Ashleigh Lin, and Yael Perry. 2020.  The Role of the Avatar in Gaming for Trans and Gender Diverse Young People.  _International journal of environmental research and public health_ 17, 22 (2020), 8617.
  * Mott et al. (2019) Martez Mott, Edward Cutrell, Mar Gonzalez Franco, Christian Holz, Eyal Ofek, Richard Stoakley, and Meredith Ringel Morris. 2019.  Accessible by design: An opportunity for virtual reality. In _2019 IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality Adjunct (ISMAR-Adjunct)_. IEEE, 451–454.
  * Neustaedter and Fedorovskaya (2009) Carman Neustaedter and Elena A Fedorovskaya. 2009.  Presenting identity in a virtual world through avatar appearances.. In _Graphics Interface_. 183–190.
  * Nowak and Fox (2018) Kristine L Nowak and Jesse Fox. 2018.  Avatars and computer-mediated communication: a review of the definitions, uses, and effects of digital representations.  _Review of Communication Research_ 6 (2018), 30–53.
  * Pace (2008) Tyler Pace. 2008\.  Can an orc catch a cab in stormwind? Cybertype preference in the World of Warcraft character creation interface.  In _CHI’08 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems_. 2493–2502.
  * Pace et al. (2009) Tyler Pace, Aaron Houssian, and Victoria McArthur. 2009\.  Are socially exclusive values embedded in the avatar creation interfaces of MMORPGs?  _Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society_ (2009).
  * Passmore and Mandryk (2018) Cale J. Passmore and Regan Mandryk. 2018.  An About Face: Diverse Representation in Games. In _Proceedings of the 2018 Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play_ (Melbourne, VIC, Australia) _(CHI PLAY ’18)_. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 365–380.  https://doi.org/10.1145/3242671.3242711
  * Shakespeare (1996) Tom Shakespeare. 1996\.  Disability, identity and difference.  _Exploring the divide_ (1996), 94–113.
  * Shakespeare et al. (2006) Tom Shakespeare et al. 2006\.  The social model of disability.  _The disability studies reader_ 2 (2006), 197–204.
  * Turkle (1994) Sherry Turkle. 1994\.  Constructions and reconstructions of self in virtual reality: Playing in the MUDs.  _Mind, Culture, and Activity_ 1, 3 (1994), 158–167.
  * Turkle (1999) Sherry Turkle. 1999\.  Cyberspace and identity.  _Contemporary sociology_ 28, 6 (1999), 643–648.
  * Wendell (2001) Susan Wendell. 2001\.  Unhealthy disabled: Treating chronic illnesses as disabilities.  _Hypatia_ 16, 4 (2001), 17–33.
  * Zhang et al. (2022) Kexin Zhang, Elmira Deldari, Zhicong Lu, Yaxing Yao, and Yuhang Zhao. 2022.  “It’s Just Part of Me:” Understanding Avatar Diversity and Self-Presentation of People with Disabilities in Social Virtual Reality _(ASSETS ’22)_. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 4, 16 pages.  https://doi.org/10.1145/3517428.3544829

##  Appendix A Demographics Summary

We offer a brief summary of the demographics of our participants.

Age: M=29.1 (SD=10.5).

Gender: 7 men or trans masc, 6 women, and 5 nonbinary or agender.

Race: 9 White, 5 as Asian or South Asian, 4 as Black or African American, 2 as
Latinx or Hispanic, 1 as other, and 3 as multiple/mixed race.

Disability, DHH, chronic or mental illness, or neurodiversity status: 6 people
who are neurodiverse, 6 people with chronic illnesses, 4 DHH people, 4 people
with mental illnesses, 3 people with mobility disabilities, 3 BLV people, 2
people who identify as being fat, and 2 people with other disabilities; 10 out
of 18 participants had multiple disabilities/conditions.