Evaluating Accessibility-in-Use
Download as PPTX, PDF
1 like3,996 views
This document proposes a method to evaluate accessibility-in-use by observing how users cope with barriers on the web. The method involves 3 steps: 1) Observing users and identifying coping strategies, 2) Developing algorithms to detect these strategies, and 3) Deploying the algorithms on websites to notify researchers of barriers encountered. A case study identified 17 coping strategies from observing 24 users. Algorithms were implemented for 8 strategies. The system, called WebTactics, injects detection algorithms onto pages and asynchronously notifies researchers when strategies are used. This allows capturing accessibility problems encountered by users in real world usage.
Evaluating Accessibility-in-Use
- 1. Evaluating Accessibility-in-Use Markel Vigo1 & Simon Harper2 University of Manchester (UK) 1: @markelvigo 2: @sharpic W4A 2013 markel.vigo@manchester.ac.uk simon.harper@manchester.ac.uk http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.701482
- 2. Evidence Guidelines cover around 53% of the problems encountered by users Power et al. 2012 Guidelines are only half of the story: accessibility problems encountered by blind users on the web CHI 2012, 433-442 W4A 201313 May 2013 2
- 3. Problem The perception of users about accessibility barriers is difficultly measurable and generalisable W4A 201313 May 2013 3
- 4. Paradox Some barriers are not perceived Some barriers are encountered but overcome Barrier free pages can cause a great hindrance W4A 201313 May 2013 4
- 5. Accessibility-in-use the effects that real accessibility problems have on the quality of interaction as perceived by real users when interacting with real pages for achieving real goals Vigo and Brajnik, 2011 Automatic web accessibility metrics: where we are and where we can go Interacting with Computers 23 (2), 137-155 W4A 201313 May 2013 5
- 6. What do we propose: Step 1. Observation & Identification of Coping Strategies 6 1. Observation W4A 201313 May 2013 Cognitive markers that indicate problematic situations
- 7. What do we propose: Step 2. Development of algorithms to detect strategies 7 1. Observation 2. Algorithms W4A 201313 May 2013
- 8. What do we propose: Step 3. Deployment in the wild 8 1. Observation 2. Algorithms 3. Deployment W4A 201313 May 2013
- 9. Case study Step 1. Observation and analysis 2 independent studies/datasets generated from ethnographic studies and user tests 24 screen reader and screen magnifier users 17 coping strategies were identified 9 W4A 201313 May 2013
- 10. Case study Step 2. Implement algorithms Asking for assistance Impulsive clicking Exploration tactics Narrowing down search Gaining orientation Re-doing Not operating Giving up 10 W4A 201313 May 2013
- 11. 11 WebTactics t1(){ .. } DB User Website Manager /Researcher 1.1 Detection algorithms are injected onto web pages. 1.2 Each algorithm keeps track of determined sequences of events and actions. 3. This event is asynchronously sent to a remote location. 2. When the use of a tactic is detected a notification is triggered. 4. Reports from users are viewed by interested parties. ti(){ .. } tn(){ .. } id timestamp URL tactic ccgu1331569030153 1333922552190 http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/ t5 ccgu1331569030153 1333922556391 http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/ t1 W4A 201313 May 2013 Case study Step 3. Deployment: WebTactics
- 12. Contributions A method to observe accessibility-in-use Our approach allows to capture the problems that emerge in the wild WebTactics W4A 201313 May 2013 12
- 13. Follow up 13 Contact @markelvigo | markel.vigo@manchester.ac.uk Presentation DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.701482 Source code https://bitbucket.org/mvigo/cope W4A 201313 May 2013