Accessibility and usability of Web‐based library databases for non‐visual users

Abstract

The ADA mandates that library programs and services be accessible to people with disabilities. With the advent of the WWW, the popularity of commercial Web‐based resources in academic libraries has soared, but are these resources accessible to people with visual disabilities? This study examines the accessibility of two popular Web‐based abstracting and indexing services, Periodical Abstracts, offered by OCLC FirstSearch, and Gale Group’s Expanded Academic ASAP, when accessed by blind users using screen‐reading programs. The study measured accessibility based on guidelines from the amended Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and on the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines issued by the WWW Consortium. The findings indicate that, while each database has a high degree of accessibility, there is a need for Web developers to conduct usability testing of commercial databases with people who rely on screen readers for access to the Web. Librarians must be cognizant of accessibility issues and demand assurance from database vendors that their products are accessible.

Compliance of Section 508 in public library systems with the largest percentage of underserved populations

“…This study was conducted by auto-testing with Bobby, and the results indicated libraries that served larger populations and ranked higher in its index were likely to be more accessible. Byerley and Chambers (2002) assessed Section 508 and WCAG compliance on Web-based library databases. By employing the blind who rely on screen reading programs, the study examined the usability as well as the accessibility for abstracting and indexing services that OCLC FirstSearch and Gale Group's Expanded Academic ASAP provided.…”

“…Previous studies have discussed the accessibility issue on websites in general (including libraries) (Brobst, 2009;Byerley & Chambers, 2002;Curl & Bowers, 2009;Farrelly, 2011;Green & Huprich, 2009;Lazar et al, 2012;Lilly & Fleet, 2000;Mates, 2004;Providenti & Zai, 2007b;Schmetzke & Comeaux, 2009;Wentz, Cirba, Kharal, Moran, & Slate, 2012;Yu & Lau, 2006), or on government websites (Abu-Doush, Bany-Mohammed, Ali, & Al-Betar, 2013;Brobst, 2012;Jaeger, 2004Jaeger, , 2006Jaeger, , 2008Jaeger & Matteson, 2009;Jaeger et al, 2013;Lazar et al, 2013). According to previous studies done about a decade ago, there are several critical barriers to compliance with Web accessibility: budget constraints, lacks of perception, skills, and knowledge, and absence of authoritative guidelines (Brophy & Craven, 2007, as cited in Disability Rights Commission (United Kingdom), 2004.…”

User studies in the electronic environment: Review and brief analysis

“…There was a gap between what instructors expect and what students were actually doing with web resources. Byerely and Chambers (2002) analysed non-visual users' accessibility and utility of web-based library databases. The study examines the accessibility of two popular web-based abstracting and indexing services -periodical abstracts offered by OCLC First Search and Gale Group's Expanded Academic ASAP, when accessed by blind users using screen reading programs.…”

Ubiquitous library usability test for the improvement of information access for the blind

“…Therefore, they examined the accessibility of two popular web-based abstracting and indexing services, Periodical Abstracts, offered by Online Computer Library Center (OCLC) FirstSearch, and Gale Group's Expanded Academic ASAP, when accessed by blind users using screen-reading programs. Their study revealed that OCLC FirstSearch and the Gale Group InfoTrac search engines provide a high degree of accessibility; however, they discovered instances in both search engines in which accessibility might be compromised by some design elements (Byerley and Chambers, 2002).…”