Feasibility Test of QR Codes for Practical Use
by Visually Impaired People
Period: May 2017 to March 2019

A collaborative project between NPO Kobe Light House, NPO i-collaboration Kobe, and Export Japan Inc.

* “QR Code” is a registered trademark of Denso Wave Incorporated.

Why did we start this project?
In August 2016, PIJIN, an affiliate company of Export Japan, received an
inquiry from Kobe Light House, an organization that helps visually
impaired people become more independent.
They wondered whether QR Translator - PIJIN’s QR code-related service could be utilized by visually impaired people to obtain information fromprinted materials using its text-to-speech function.

From that point on, we learned much about visual impairment.

2

Who is blind? Who has low vision?
• U.S. definition of legal blindness
1. Visual Acuity (The better-seeing eye with the best conventionalcorrection, such as glasses or contact lenses)• Blind: 20/200 or less
• Low vision: 20/70 or less
• Unimpaired: 20/20

2. Visual Field (without moving the eye)
• Blind: 20 degrees or less
• Unimpaired: 180 degrees

Snellen Eye Chart

FACT
Among visually
impaired people, only
15% are completely
blind (NLP: no lightperception)3

Statistics
No. of visually impaired people: 1.64 million
Percentage: 1.3% of the total population
No. of blind people: 187,800
According to Japan Ophthalmologists Association (2007)

No. of visually impaired people: ~440 million
Percentage: 6.0% of the world’s population
No of blind people: 36 million
According to The LANCET Global Health (2017)4

Challenges in Daily Life
● Challenges: Visually impaired people face various difficulties in their daily life,
such as when traveling, navigating, shopping, and accessing information.
However, one of the most critical challenges is the “Accessible Information”
problem.
● While the world has been moving towards an information-driven society throughimprovements and developments in communication and information technology,
most visually impaired people still lack access to most of these services.
Information plays an important role in social organization as it enables people toparticipate more fully in public, promotes decision-making in individuals, andencourages equality while simultaneously preventing inequality.
5Much information has been digitalized and put on the internet,
where many devices can access it.

Accessible
Information
Problem

Accessibility features on smartphones support
people with disabilities in various ways.
Screen Reader, which converts information fromtext to speech, is available on several platforms.

But it is limited to digital information!
What about printed Information?
6

Is braille a solution?

Japanese Braille• Unfortunately, braille is not universal.
• There is a different braille script for each language.

• Approximately only one-eighth of visually impaired people
can read braille.

English Braille• Braille cannot easily fit in small or limited spaces, such as
on product labels.

* We are not in any way contesting the importance of braille and understand it is indispensable for a large
number of people with visual impairments.
7

Our Goal

We aim to realize a more barrier-free environment requiring less effort
from visually impaired people and society proposing a possible solution.

Society/Companies

Printed Info

Visually Impaired
PeoplePrinted Info

Technology

8Connecting Bridge –Physical & Digital
Smartphones are useful to everyone. Most
modern smartphones have several
accessibility features that support the daily
life of visually impaired people.
One of the most useful features is “Screen
Reader.” It is called “VoiceOver” on the
iOS platform and “TalkBack” on the
Android platform.

9Question: Is it possible to convert printed texts on physicalmaterials to audio by transferring them to a smartphone to beread by a screen reader?

Hypothesis: QR codes can be a bridge that connects physicaland digital information, and they can help visually impaired
people access information printed on physical materials.

10Why QR codes?
• QR codes are a patent-free universal technology we can see worldwide.
• QR codes can be printed anywhere - on documents, product labels, signboards, andeven on clothes.
• QR codes are the most common tool for bringing users from conventional print media todigital media.
• QR code scanning applications are built into many modern smartphones by default.

11

Report on the QR Code Readability Tests by
Visually Impaired People with Smartphones#1

Experiment Period: August 3, 2017, to March 16, 2018
NPO Kobe Light House, NPO i-collaboration Kobe, and Export Japan Inc.

The Flow of the Experiments
1.

We asked visually impaired participants to sit in chairs with theirsmartphones in hand. – In case they didn’t have their own
smartphones, we lent ours to them.

2.

We explained the purposes of this test and got their consent
signatures.

3.

We asked for their profile and wrote them to the test documents.

4.

We conducted the experiments following the lists of test documents.

5.

We set the time limit of each scanning test as 1 minute. If it takes
more than one minute, we judged it as “unsuccessful”.

* Note: We provided guidance to the participants who couldn’t scan QR codes on their firsttest only by taking their hands because some had never used smartphones.
13

Purposes of Experiment 1• To examine our hypothesis: “QR codes may help visually impaired people acquire
information from printed material.”• To determine how visually impaired people use their smartphones to scan QR codes• To know what percentage of visually impaired people can successfully scan QR codes• To discover if there is an obstacle to preventing visually impaired people from successfully
scanning QR codes• To know how visually impaired people feel regarding QR code scanning and the potentialityof it.
14

Participants of Experiment 1
Total:
Average Age:
Gender:

100 participants (from 5 different regions)

Blindness:

60% Blind
40% Low vision

55 years old (out of 43 respondents)
64% Male
36% Female15Percentage of Braille Users: 73.2%(60 out of 82 Respondents)
Low vision total: 45.5%

Low vision (%)

27.3

18.2

Blind total: 91.8%
Blind (%)

71.4

0

10

20

30

Experienced

20.4

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Little experience16

Percentage of Participants Who Have Used Smartphones: 57.7%(56 out of 97 Respondents)

Low vision (%)

55.0%

Blind (%)

59.6%

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

17

Percentage of Participants who have used QR code: 39.4%(39 out of 99 Respondents)

51.3%

Low vision (%)

Blind (%)

31.7%

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

18

Dimensions of Our Analysis
Through Experiment 1, we tried to know if QR codes are really useful for
visually impaired people. If yes, what would be the critical factors indetermining their practicality? To know them, we picked up the following
dimensions:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Position of QR code
Necessity of guidance (how to scan)
Existence of tactile mark(s)Shape of the object
Feeling of stress (for participants for scanning QR codes)

19Test 1 of Experiment 1
We prepared 4 brochures on which QR codes were printed in 4 different positions. We
provided guidance for the participants who failed to scan the code on this test.

Upper Left

Upper Right

Bottom Left

Bottom Right

20

The success rate of scanning the QR code before and after
guidance based on positions.

After

52

Upper Left

QR Code Position

Before98

93

Upper Right

100

86

Bottom Left

99

95

Bottom Right

100
0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Number of Participants (100)21The success rate of scanning the QR
code before and after guidance basedon positions.
BeforeThe success rate of scanning the QR codeon Upper Left position before and after
guidance.
After
Before52

Upper Left

QR Code Position

After

98

Breakdow
n
Blind

61.6%

36.70%

98.30%

93

Upper Right99

Smartphoneusers

71.40% 28.6%
100%

QR codeusers

71.80% 28.2%
100%

95

Bottom Right

22.5%

Low vision

86

Bottom Left

75%

100

97.50%

100

0%
0

20

40

60

80

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

100

Number of Participants (100)** Note: The success rate on the Upper Left position before guidance is much lower than others because, we suppose, it was
the very first test of the experiment.
22

What We Learned from the Test 1 are...
The position of QR codes is not the critical factor, as all QR
code positions achieved a similar success rate except the beforeguidance test on the upper left part, which was the very first trial
for the participants.
Comparing the results between before and after
guidance, It was clear that the success rateincreased in every position. Therefore, the criticalfactor is guidance or experience.

See the video how
they scan QR codes* Note: We didn’t provide the guidance after the test 1 of Experiment 1.
23

Test 2 of Experiment 1
We prepared 6 kinds of products – all 3-dimensional objects - with 4 different shapes andmaterials. Among 4 of them, we put tactile marks to compare with 2 other unmarked
products.

Paper soap box (Unmarked)

Paper soap box (Marked)

PET bottle (Unmarked)

Plastic candy bag (Marked)

PET bottle (Marked)* Those products were bought from retail stores ** Tactile marks were made by us.

Cylindrical can (Marked)
24

The difference in success rates
between marked and unmarked
products was 10 to 13％.

The Success Rate of Marked andUnmarked 3D Objects
100.00%10%

98.00%

88.00%

90.00%

84.00%
80.00%

13%
71.00%

Paper Soap Box (6-sided box)

70.00%

60.00%

50.00%

Paper soap box
Unmarked

PET Bottle (4-sided plastic bottle)

PET bottle
Marked25

The Success Rate of Scanning a QR Code on 3D Objects 6 trials for 6 products - by Participants Profile
Blind

80.7%

Low vision

90.8%

Smartphone users

88.7%

QR code users

Total :
84.6%

91.0%
0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1
26

The Success Rate of Scanning QR Codes - 1 trial each for
4 marked products – by the Type of 3D Objects

Paper Soap Box

84%

Plastic Candy Bag

72%

PET Bottle

98%

Cylindrical Aluminum Can

Difference:
< 26%

95%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%
27

What We Learned from the Test 2 are...
There was a significant difference in the success rate ofscanning QR codes on 3D objects that have beenmarked versus those that have not. As a result, weconcluded that the tactile marks played a crucial rolein serving as a reliable location indicator.
See the video on how difficult
to scan unmarked codes.

Comparing the results by the shape of products, the success rate differsby 26%. This showed that the shape of products greatly influenced
the success rate.
* There were much differences in the size of QR codes on 4 different shapes of products. At this moment, we had not thoughtof the possibility that the size of QR codes could be a critical factor of the success rate.
28

Major Causes of Unsuccessful Scanning
Through the observations of Test 1 and 2, we have identified the major causes of why
visually impaired people fail to scan QR codes as follows:• One hand, while another held the smartphone, overlapped the QR code.
• They moved smartphones too fast to let the lens auto-focus QR codes.

• They couldn’t catch the best distance between the smartphone and the QR code. In
most cases, it was too close to capture the wider area.

• They didn’t seem easy to hold the smartphone cameras parallel to QR codes.

29Exp1 Section 5

Survey 1 of Experiment 1- If the participants felt stressed about scanning QR codes Did you feel stressed if you
knew there was a QR code but
couldn’t scan it?
(96 respondents)

Did you feel stressed if you didn’tknow whether there was a QR
code and couldn’t scan it?
(89 respondents)

Did you feel it was difficult
to scan QR codes?
(100 respondents)

13.5

20.8

37
63

79.2

Yes

No

86.5

Yes

No

Yes

No
30

What We Learned from the Survey 1 are...
Many participants felt stressed if they couldn’t scan QR codes
successfully. And the stress became bigger in case they weren’t sure if
there were QR codes.

Nearly 2/3 of participants replied that QR code scanning was notdifficult. An important factor in reducing their stress is how QR codes arepresented for them to be scanned easily.

31Survey 2 of Experiment 1

12

How to Cook Instant Noodles

12

Bus and Train Timetables

9

Restaurant Menus

8Electrical Product Manuals

7

Documents from Government Offices

6Music CD (Type)5

14* Multiple Answers

32

5

Postal Information

16

6

17

7

Medicine Information (Prescription)
Clothing Information(color/material/washing method)
Detergents (Type)

8

19

9

Place of Origin and List of Ingredients

12

22

12

Beverages (Type)

14

35

16

Food Expiration Dates

17

50

19

Food Products (Type)22

No. ofRespondents

35

Information

50- The kind of information the participants want to obtain through QR codes – That they feel is difficult toaccess in daily life.

What We Learned from the Survey 2 are...
There are great needs for visually impaired people to accessinformation about foods or medicines which may become fatal in caseof mis-ingestion. Those needs are more serious for those who live
alone.

Some participants already used QR codes or tactile stickers to
distinguish the products they bought in retail stores. At the time of
shopping, store staff may help them to choose products. But, the real
challenge for those who live alone starts after returning home from the
shopping. (through the free conversations during the survey.)33

Other Remarkable Feedback from the Participants•“The most important for me is if the available information is what we really want to know.
In case of the important information, I won’t care taking how much time to scan it.”•

“I found it difficult to scan at first. However, after acquiring a sense of appropriate
distance, I found scanning them much easier.” -There seems to be a slight adjustment
period for participants to find the correct distance.

•“I have low vision, so when I’m at a supermarket, I bring items very close to my face tocheck what they are, and this sometimes makes other people look at me odd. I think the
QR codes on products are beneficial for avoiding that.”34

Understanding of visually impaired people• Visually impaired people have lots of challenges in their daily lives in accessing
necessary information.
• Some visually impaired people already use smartphones or QR codes to obtain
information digitally.
• The information that visually impaired people need the most is for theiringestions, such as foods, beverages, and medicines.
• It is not very difficult for visually impaired people to scan QR codes. But, they
feel stressed if they are not presented suitably.

Summary ofExperiment 1

Understanding of possible factors to decide the successful scanning of QR codes• Guidance or experience is a critical factor for successfully scanning QR codes.
• Positions of QR codes do not have much influence on the success rate.
• The presence of a tactile mark raises the success rate.
• The shapes or materials of products greatly impact the success rate.
Conclusion• QR codes can potentially help visually impaired people acquire necessary
information from printed objects.
• There seem to be many factors to consider to increase the success rate ofscanning QR codes by visually impaired people.
• The contents of the information is another key to increasing the practicality of
QR codes.
• We need to do more research to determine any other critical factors.
35

Report on the QR Code Readability Tests by
Visually Impaired People with Smartphones#2

Experiment Period: October 1, 2018, to November 2, 2018
NPO Kobe Light House, NPO i-collaboration Kobe, and Export Japan Inc.

Purposes of Experiment 2• To validate our assumptions obtained in Experiment 1• To further analyze critical factors that determine the success rate of QR code

scanning, such as tactile marks or sizes of QR codes• To find out the indispensable features for designing visually impaired people-

friendly QR codes• To receive further feedback from visually impaired people regarding QR code
scanning

37

Participants of Experiment 2
Total:
Average Age:
Gender:Blindness:

50 participants (Living in 3 different regions)52.9 years old
72% Male (36 people)
28% Female (14 people)
58% Blind (29 people)
42% Low vision (21 people)

38Percentage of Braille Users: 60.0%(30 out of 50 Participants)
Low vision total: 52.3%

19.0

Low vision (%)

33.3

Blind total: 65.5%
55.2

Blind (%)

0

10

20

30

10.3

40

Experienced

50

60

70

80

90

100

Little experience39Percentage of Participants Who Have Used a Smartphone: 58.0%(29 out of 50 Participants)

61.9%

Low vision (%)

55.2%

Blind (%)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100
40

Percentage of Participants Who Have Used QR Codes: 62.0%(31 out of 50 Participants)

Low vision (%)

71.4%

Blind (%)

55.2%

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100
41

Dimensions of Our Analysis
Through the Experiment 2, we tried to figure out what kind of factors determine thesuccess rate for visually impaired people scanning QR codes. To know them, we
picked up the following dimensions:

1.
2.
3.
4.

Existence of tactile marks on paper (2D printed material)
Size of QR code (0.6, 0.8, 1.0, 1.2 cm)
Existence of tactile marks on products (3D objects)
Types of tactile marks on products (3D objects)

42

Test 1 of Experiment 2
We prepared 2 brochures with QR codes printed in the same
position. However, One of them had one corner cut off to inform theparticipants that there was a QR code around.

Normal Paper(Unmarked)

Corner Cut Paper(Marked)• Success rate for the unmarked sheet: 84% (42/50 participants)• Success rate for the marked sheet: 100% (50/50 participants)

The Success Rate – 2 trials for 2 sheets –by Participants Profile
Blind

Low vision

The Success Rate of Blind

Breakdown

72.41%

100%

Participants
100%
100%

Smartphone users

100%
50%

QR code users

44.82%

100%
0%

0

20

40

60

80

100

Unmarked

Marked43

What We Learned from the Test 1 are...
For low-vision participants, a tactile mark of a QR code on a 2D
object (e.g., paper) didn’t seem as important as for blind ones
because the success rate by the low-vision group was 100% on
this Test, both for marked and unmarked papers. However, thetactile presence of a QR code seemed important for blind people
as the success rate of the blind group dropped significantly in thecase of no tactile mark.
From the observations, in the case of no tactile marks, the blindparticipants seemed worried if there was a QR code, while somelow-vision participants could easily identify the location of a QR
code because it was black-and-white, the two strongest contrast ofcolors.
44

Prepared Materials for the Tests 2-4 of Experiment 2

Unmarked

0.6 cm x 0.6 cm

0.8 cm x 0.8 cm

1.0 cm x 1.0 cm

1.2 cm x 1.2 cm

Convex (凸)Concave (凹)Sticker

Dots

Sticker

Dots

Unmarked* Note: Tactile marks were made by our staff.

45

Test 2 of Experiment 2
We prepared 4 brochures with QR codes printed in the same position but in 4 different sizes. We also
analyzed the results by Japanese regions in which we conducted the test on different dates to see if thisexperiment had other hidden factors or biases.
• 0.6 cm×0.6 cm 48%(24/50 participants)• 0.8 cm×0.8 cm 82%(41/50 participants)• 1.0 cm×1.0 cm 96%(48/50 participants)• 1.2 cm×1.2 cm 100% (50/50 participants)
Kanto
Size Total (50) (15: 12-3)*

Chubu(16: 9-7)

Kansai(19: 8-11)

The Success Rate by Size by Region
100.00%100.00%96.00%
90.00%

82.00%

80.00%
70.00%

0.6

48.00%

60.00%

31.25%

52.63%

0.8

82.00%

86.67%

81.25%

78.95%

60.00%
50.00%

48.00%

40.00%

1.0

96.00%

100.00%93.75%

94.74%

1.2

100.00%100.00%100.00%100.00%* Region (Total participants: Blind-Low vision)

30.00%
20.00%

0.4

0.6

Total

0.8

1.0

1.2

Kanto

Chubu

Kansai

1.4

46

What We Learned from the Test 2 are...
The size of QR codes has a strong impact on the success rate ofscanning QR codes. The rate dropped significantly if the size
become less than 1.0 cm square.
There weren’t many differences in the success rate between blindand low-vision participants as every region has the same tendency
even though the ratio of blind to low-vision participants was quite
different by region.

47

Test 3 of Experiment 2
We prepared 5 boxes of the same product with QR codes printed on the same position ofeach box in the same size and with 4 different tactile marks around the QR code, except 1
with no mark. The 4 different types of tactile marks are convex, concave, seal sticker, anddots. We also analyzed the results by Japanese regions in which we conducted the test on
different dates to see if this experiment had other hidden factors or biases.
The Success Rate by Mark by Region
Type

Total
(50)

Kanto
(15: 12-3)

Chubu(16: 9-7)

Kansai(19: 8-11)

100.00%90.00%
80.00%

No mark

68.00%

73.33%

50.00%

78.95%

70.00%
60.00%

96.00%

100.00%100.00%89.47%

Concave (凹) 98.00%

100.00%93.75%

100.00%

Seal Sticker

100.00%93.75%

94.74%

Convex (凸)96.00%

50.00%
40.00%
30.00%
20.00%
10.00%

Dots

96.00%

100.00%87.50%

100.00%

0.00%

Total

* Region (Total participants: Blind-Low vision)

No mark

Kanto

Convex

Chubu

Concave

Seal

KansaiDot
48

What We Learned from the Test 3 are...
The QR code scanning success rate was quite high, even for the
6-dimensional objects, if tactile marks were provided. But, the rate
dropped significantly if a tactile mark was not provided.
There weren’t any significant differences in the success rate among
the types of tactile marks. So, the critical factor influencing the
success rate of QR code scanning for visually impaired people isthe existence of tactile marks and not the type of them.

49Test 4 of Experiment 2
We prepared 3 cans of the same product with QR codes printed in the same position ofeach can in the same size and with 2 different tactile marks around the QR code, except 1
with no mark. The 2 different types of tactile marks are seal sticker and dots. We also
analyzed the results by Japanese regions in which we conducted the test on different dates
to see if this experiment had other hidden factors or biases.
The Success Rate by Mark by Region
100.00%90.00%

Type

Total
(50)

Kanto
Chubu Kansai(15: 12-3) (16: 9-7) (19: 8-11)

80.00%
70.00%
60.00%

No mark

58.00%

53.33%

50.00%

68.42%

50.00%
40.00%

Seal Sticker

90.00% 100.00%

81.25%

89.47%

30.00%
20.00%

Dots

86.00%

86.67%

81.25%

89.47%

10.00%
0.00%* Region (Total participants: Blind-Low vision)

Total

Kanto

No mark

Chubu

Seal

KansaiDot

50

What We Learned from the Test 3 are...
The QR code scanning success rate was quite high, even for theround 3D objects (cylindrical cans), if tactile marks were provided.
However, the success rate dropped significantly when a tactile
mark was not provided for both blind and low-vision participants.
There weren’t any significant differences in the success rate
between two types of tactile marks. So, the critical factor influencing
the success rate of QR code scanning for visually impaired people
is the existence of tactile marks, not the type.

51

Summary ofExperiment 2

Understanding the critical factors of the success rate
• From the results of Tests 1, 3, and 4, it’s undoubtful that atactile indication of a QR code is the critical factor for increasing
the success rate for visually impaired people to scan QR codes.
• From the results of Test 2, it seems that the smaller a QR code
becomes, the more difficult it becomes to be scanned forvisually impaired people.
• From the results of Tests 3 and 4, it seems obvious that thetype of tactile marks is not the critical factor, but their presenceis.
• From the results of Tests 2, 3, and 4, there didn’t seem to be
any differences among the results of regions where we
conducted the Experiment on different dates.
Conclusion• With Experiment 2, we could confirm that some assumptions
made from Experiment 1 were correct. There seem to be many
interrelated factors that may affect the successful scanning of
QR codes by visually impaired people. We should continue
trying to discover other factors we might have missed.
52

Notes• The room brightness is an essential factor for successful QR code
scanning. We didn’t set any numerical criteria but requested it as“bright enough.” We did not see any significant differences among
regions even though we conducted the tests on different dates andin different rooms for each region.
• We did not include any analysis of participants’ gender and age
because we assumed they weren’t specific factors to visually
impaired people. (They must be the same as sighted people.)• We collected data on participants’ smartphones’ OS and theversions the participants used. We lent our smartphones only tothose who did not have their own. More than 90% of theparticipants used iPhones for the tests. Thus, we didn’t give any
analysis regarding the difference in OS.
• We used only black-and-white QR codes for the tests. Nowadays,
there are colored QR codes in the market. People with low visionfind it easier to identify black-and-white QR codes because those
two colors have the highest contrast. Hence, the color of QR codes
may affect the success rate for some visually impaired people.
• No person participated twice or more in the same test. But some ofthe participants of Experiment 1 also took part in Experiment 2.
Less than 30% of Experiment 2 comprised the participants inExperiment 1.

53

What we might have missed
After Experiment 1&2, we found other critical factors when consideringvisually impaired people-friendly QR codes.
1. QR code version (https://www.qrcode.com/en/about/version.html)
The smaller a QR code version is, the easier it is to scan because smaller versions havefewer cells. This means that each cell has more interspace to be read by a QR code
reader. Version 5 QR codes were used in Test 2 of Experiment 2.
2. Printer resolution
The higher the printer resolution is, the finer the cells of QR codes can be printed. A 600
dpi resolution printer was used for scanning Test 2 of Experiment 2. Nowadays, many
commercial printers have finer resolution than our testing environment.
3. Smartphone camera’s resolution
The higher the resolution, the further away people can scan the QR code from. In our
experiments, we guided participants to scan the QR codes from a distance of around 20 to
30 cm so that the cameras could capture a wider area. Most smartphones nowadays havehigher-resolution built-in cameras than we used in our experiments.
54

After the Experiments• We’ve become more confident that QR codes can be an alternative to braillefor visually impaired people to gain more information on physical matters suchas products, signs, or documents.
• The experiments were conducted only in Japan this time. So we wish we
could verify if similar results can be obtained in other countries, regions, or
languages.
• Thinking of the practical use of QR codes for visually impaired people insociety, there must be many other factors we have to consider. However, we
can gradually increase their practicality by focusing on controllable factors,
such as their sizes, tactile presentations, or useful content.
• We also must consider the differences in available resources, such as devices
and Internet connections, from the universal perspective.
• Google Camera may be somewhat of an alternative – At this moment, QR
codes are much easier to scan than physical text paragraphs, though.
• Above all, we must hear many more voices of visually impaired people toknow what they need or want.
Thank you.
55

Tell us your opinions

Email: pvip@export-japan.co.jp

Website: https://accessible-code.com/

56