Validating WCAG versions 1.0 and 2.0 through usability testing with disabled users

Rømen, Dagfinn; Svanæs, Dag

doi:10.1007/s10209-011-0259-3

Cited by 90 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In the virtual framework, uncounted resources have been dedicated over the last several decades to improve and generate new models and methods for accessing content (rules and recommendations), thereby adapting those contents to all types of users and devices [20]. These efforts are dynamic and constantly changing, especially considering the constant technological revolution that continuously transforms these devices and their capabilities.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In particular, aspects such as security [21], and adaptation and communication with users of advanced age [22], or with disabilities [23], are perhaps the most developed work within Design or Multimedia studies. These aspects are the main disciplines in the effort to generate applications that are accessible to all types of users, with customizable and usable interaction adapted to the basic navigation rules [20].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Mixed-methods research: a new approach to evaluating the motivation and satisfaction of university students using advanced visual technologies

Fonseca

Redondo

Villagrasa

2014

Univ Access Inf Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The final publication is available at link.springer.comA mixed-methods study evaluating the motivation and satisfaction of Architecture degree students using interactive visualization methods is presented in this paper. New technology implementations in the teaching field have been largely extended to all types of levels and educational frameworks. However, these innovations require approval validation and evaluation by the final users, the students. In this paper, the advantages and disadvantages of applying mixed evaluation technology are discussed in a case study of the use of interactive and collaborative tools for the visualization of 3D architectonical models. The main objective was to evaluate Architecture and Building Science students’ the motivation to use and satisfaction with this type of technology and to obtain adequate feedback that allows for the optimization of this type of experiment in future iterations.Postprint (author’s final draft

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mixed-methods research: a new approach to evaluating the motivation and satisfaction of university students using advanced visual technologies

Fonseca

Redondo

Villagrasa

2014

Univ Access Inf Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Finally, there was no difference between the severity ratings of the distinct problems found by both protocols from either user group and the severity of the problems that RVP failed to uncover was relatively low. Although CVP is the more commonly used protocol [8,12,19,20,22], in this study CVP only identified approximately half of the distinct problems, whereas RVP identified three quarters. This contradicts the results of previous studies conducted by van den Haak et al [25][26][27][28], that compared the two verbal protocols with sighted participants and found that they were comparable in terms of effectiveness.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 64%

“…The most frequent disabled groups involved are blind users. Studies that have included blind participants have almost exclusively had them perform CVP [8,12,19,20,22]. While it seems the standard protocol to use, it is a method that adds additional workload to the users in vocalizing their thoughts about their actions and the problems they encounter while trying to undertake a task.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A number of studies have compared these two types of verbal protocol with sighted participants, in terms of the information gathered [3,17] and the number of problems revealed [25,26]. However, a comparison of these protocols when used with blind participants has not yet been performed, in spite of the fact that there are a number of studies which have used verbal protocols with blind participants [8,12,19,20,22]. CVP may add additional effort particularly for blind participants, as the mental effort of using the web for blind users with screen readers is typically greater than understanding the web visually.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparing Concurrent and Retrospective Verbal Protocols for Blind and Sighted Users

Savva

Petrie

Power

2015

Human-Computer Interaction – INTERACT 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Verbal protocols are widely used in user studies for evaluating websites. This study investigated the effectiveness and efficiency of concurrent and retrospective verbal protocols (CVP and RVP) for both blind and sighted participants, as well as participant workload and attitudes towards these methods. Eight blind and eight sighted participants undertook both protocols in a website evaluation. RVP was more effective as measured by problems encountered for both groups, although it was no more efficient than CVP. The severity of problems identified by both protocols was equivalent. As measured on the NASA TLX, participants found RVP found more demanding than CVP. Sighted participants found rating problems during CVP more disruptive than blind participants. These results show that RVP is a more useful protocol for practitioners and researchers even though it takes more time and is more demanding for participants. It is equally applicable for both blind and sighted participants.

show abstract

Identification of factors associated with blind users' help‐seeking situations in interacting with digital libraries

Xie

Babu

Castillo

et al. 2017

Asso for Info Science & Tech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A sight‐centered digital library (DL) design with complex structures and multimedia formats poses significant challenges for blind users. This study is the first attempt to investigate the top three help‐seeking situations as well as associated factors in blind users' DL interactions. A mixed‐method approach was adopted for this study. Multiple methods were applied to collect data from 30 blind subjects: questionnaires, presearch interviews, think aloud protocols, transaction logs, and postsearch interviews. The paper identifies the top three help‐seeking situations, and associated factors in relation to user, system, task, and interaction. Moreover, different types of main‐level factors were tested to investigate if they are correlated to each type of top situation, and qualitative data of sublevel factors offer insight into how these factors are associated with various situations. Without a clear understanding of these situations and factors, the objective of universal access to information in DLs cannot be achieved. DL design implications are further discussed with the goal of providing system design recommendations for reducing blind users' help‐seeking situations.

show abstract

Validating WCAG versions 1.0 and 2.0 through usability testing with disabled users

Cited by 90 publications

References 9 publications

Mixed-methods research: a new approach to evaluating the motivation and satisfaction of university students using advanced visual technologies

Mixed-methods research: a new approach to evaluating the motivation and satisfaction of university students using advanced visual technologies

Comparing Concurrent and Retrospective Verbal Protocols for Blind and Sighted Users

Identification of factors associated with blind users' help‐seeking situations in interacting with digital libraries

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About