Journal article
Implementing Recommendations From Web Accessibility Guidelines: A Comparative Study of Nondisabled Users and Users With Visual Impairments.
- Schmutz S University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland.
- Sonderegger A University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland.
- Sauer J University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland.
- 2017-05-04
Published in:
- Human factors. - 2017
WCAG 2.0
Web accessibility
nondisabled users
visual impairments
Adult
Consumer Behavior
Disabled Persons
Guidelines as Topic
Humans
Internet
User-Computer Interface
Vision Disorders
English
OBJECTIVE
The present study examined whether implementing recommendations of Web accessibility guidelines would have different effects on nondisabled users than on users with visual impairments.
BACKGROUND
The predominant approach for making Web sites accessible for users with disabilities is to apply accessibility guidelines. However, it has been hardly examined whether this approach has side effects for nondisabled users. A comparison of the effects on both user groups would contribute to a better understanding of possible advantages and drawbacks of applying accessibility guidelines.
METHOD
Participants from two matched samples, comprising 55 participants with visual impairments and 55 without impairments, took part in a synchronous remote testing of a Web site. Each participant was randomly assigned to one of three Web sites, which differed in the level of accessibility (very low, low, and high) according to recommendations of the well-established Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 (WCAG 2.0). Performance (i.e., task completion rate and task completion time) and a range of subjective variables (i.e., perceived usability, positive affect, negative affect, perceived aesthetics, perceived workload, and user experience) were measured.
RESULTS
Higher conformance to Web accessibility guidelines resulted in increased performance and more positive user ratings (e.g., perceived usability or aesthetics) for both user groups. There was no interaction between user group and accessibility level.
CONCLUSION
Higher conformance to WCAG 2.0 may result in benefits for nondisabled users and users with visual impairments alike.
APPLICATION
Practitioners may use the present findings as a basis for deciding on whether and how to implement accessibility best.
The present study examined whether implementing recommendations of Web accessibility guidelines would have different effects on nondisabled users than on users with visual impairments.
BACKGROUND
The predominant approach for making Web sites accessible for users with disabilities is to apply accessibility guidelines. However, it has been hardly examined whether this approach has side effects for nondisabled users. A comparison of the effects on both user groups would contribute to a better understanding of possible advantages and drawbacks of applying accessibility guidelines.
METHOD
Participants from two matched samples, comprising 55 participants with visual impairments and 55 without impairments, took part in a synchronous remote testing of a Web site. Each participant was randomly assigned to one of three Web sites, which differed in the level of accessibility (very low, low, and high) according to recommendations of the well-established Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 (WCAG 2.0). Performance (i.e., task completion rate and task completion time) and a range of subjective variables (i.e., perceived usability, positive affect, negative affect, perceived aesthetics, perceived workload, and user experience) were measured.
RESULTS
Higher conformance to Web accessibility guidelines resulted in increased performance and more positive user ratings (e.g., perceived usability or aesthetics) for both user groups. There was no interaction between user group and accessibility level.
CONCLUSION
Higher conformance to WCAG 2.0 may result in benefits for nondisabled users and users with visual impairments alike.
APPLICATION
Practitioners may use the present findings as a basis for deciding on whether and how to implement accessibility best.
- Language
-
- English
- Open access status
- closed
- Identifiers
-
- DOI 10.1177/0018720817708397
- PMID 28467134
- Persistent URL
- https://folia.unifr.ch/global/documents/63062
Statistics
Document views: 13
File downloads: