Information Wayfinding of Screen Reader Users: Five Personas to Expand Conceptualizations of User Experiences

Accessing 3D models remains challenging for Screen Reader (SR) users. While some existing 3D viewers allow creators to provide alternative text, they often lack sufficient detail about the 3D models. Grounded on a formative study, this paper introduces SweeperBot, a system that enables SR users to leverage visual question answering to explore and compare 3D models. SweeperBot answers SR users’ visual questions by combining an optimal view selection technique with the strength of generative- and recognition-based foundation models. An expert review with 10 Blind and Low-Vision (BLV) users with SR experience demonstrated the feasibility of using SweeperBot to assist BLV users in exploring and comparing 3D models. The quality of the descriptions generated by SweeperBot was validated by a second survey study with 30 sighted participants.

With the advent of Web 2.0 technologies, websites have evolved from static pages to dynamic, interactive Web-based applications with the ability to replicate common desktop functionality. However, for blind and visually impaired individuals who rely upon screen readers, Web 2.0 applications force them to adapt to an inaccessible use model. Many technologies, including WAI-ARIA, AJAX, and improved screen reader support, are rapidly evolving to improve this situation. However, simply combining them does not solve the problems of screen reader users. The main contributions of this paper are two models of interaction for screen reader users, for both traditional websites and Web 2.0 applications. Further contributions are a discussion of accessibility difficulties screen reader users encounter when interacting with Web 2.0 applications, a user workflow design model for improving Web 2.0 accessibility, and a set of design requirements for developers to ease the user's burden and increase accessibility. These models, accessibility difficulties, and design implications are based directly on responses and lessons learned from usability research focusing on Web 2.0 usage and screen reader users. Without the conscious effort of Web engineers and designers, most blind and visually impaired users will shy away from using new Web 2.0 technology in favor of desktop based applications.

Screen reader plugins are small pieces of code that blind users can download and install to enhance the capabilities of their screen readers. In this paper, we aim to understand the user experience of screen readers’ plugins, as well as their developers, distribution model, and maintenance. To this end, we conducted a study with 14 blind screen reader users. Our study revealed that screen reader users rely on plugins for various reasons, e.g., to improve the usability of both screen readers and application software, to make partially accessible applications accessible, and to enable custom shortcuts and commands. Furthermore, installing plugins is easy; uninstalling them is unlikely; and finding them online is ad hoc, challenging, and poses security threats. In addition, developing screen reader plugins is technically demanding; only a handful of people develop plugins, and they are well-recognized in the community. Finally, there is no central repository for plugins for most screen readers, and most plugins do not receive updates from their developers and become obsolete. The lack of financial incentives plays in the slow growth of the plugin ecosystem. Based on our findings, we recommend creating a central repository for all plugins, engaging third-party developers, and raising general awareness about the benefits and dangers of plugins. We believe our findings will inspire researchers to embrace the plugin-based distribution model as an effective way to combat application-level accessibility issues.

In previous research, the computer frustrations of student and workplace users have been documented. However, the challenges faced by blind users on the Web have not been previously examined. In this study, 100 blind users, using time diaries, recorded their frustrations using the Web. The top causes of frustration reported were (a) page layout causing confusing screen reader feedback; (b) conflict between screen reader and application; (c) poorly designed/unlabeled forms; (d) no alt text for pictures; and (e) 3-way tie between misleading links, inaccessible PDF, and a screen reader crash. Most of the causes of frustration, such as inappropriate form and graphic labels and confusing page layout, are relatively simple to solve if Webmasters and Web designers focus on this effort. In addition, the more technically challenging frustrations, such as screen reader crashes and conflicts, need to be addressed by the screen reader developers. Blind users in this study were likely to repeatedly attempt to solve a frustration, not give up, and not reboot the computer. In this study, the blind users reported losing, on average, 30.4% of time due to these frustrating situations. Implications for Web developers, screen reader developers, and screen reader users are discussed in this article.

Eighteen academic library users who are blind were interviewed about their experiences with academic libraries and the libraries’ websites using an open-ended questionnaire and recorded telephone interviews. The study approaches these topics from a user-centered perspective, with the idea that blind users themselves can provide particularly reliable insights into the issues and potential solutions that are most critical to them. Most participants used reference librarians’ assistance, and most had positive experiences. High-level screen reader users requested help with specific needs. A larger number of participants reported contacting a librarian because of feeling overwhelmed by the library website. In some cases, blind users and librarians worked verbally without the screen reader. Users were appreciative of librarians’ help but outcomes were not entirely positive. Other times, librarians worked with users to navigate with a screen reader, which sometimes led to greater independence. Some users expressed satisfaction with working with librarians verbally, particularly if websites did not seem screen reader user friendly, but many users preferred independence. Participants agreed it would be helpful if librarians knew how to use screen readers, or at least if librarians were familiar enough with screen readers to provide relevant verbal cues. Many users liked and used chat reference and many preferred Purdue Online Writing Lab (OWL) to learn citation style, though learning citation style was challenging. Questions such as reference librarians’ role when e-resources are not equally accessible deserve wider discussion in the library literature and in practice. Given the challenges described by the research participants and legal requirements for equally effective electronic and information technologies, libraries and librarians should approach reference services for blind users more proactively. Recommendations are provided.

A verbal protocol technique, adopted for a web usability evaluation, requires that the users are able to perform a double task: surfing and talking. Nevertheless, when blind users surf by using a screen reader and talk about the way they interact with the computer, the evaluation is influenced by a structural interference: users are forced to think aloud and listen to the screen reader at the same time. The aim of this study is to build up a verbal protocol technique for samples of visual impaired users in order to overcome the limits of concurrent and retrospective protocols. The technique we improved, called partial concurrent thinking aloud (PCTA), integrates a modified set of concurrent verbalization and retrospective analysis. One group of 6 blind users and another group of 6 sighted users evaluated the usability of a website using PCTA. By estimating the number of necessary users by the means of an asymptotic test, it was found out that the two groups had an equivalent ability of identifying usability problems, both over 80%. The result suggests that PCTA, while respecting the properties of classic verbal protocols, also allows to overcome the structural interference and the limits of concurrent and retrospective protocols when used with screen reader users. In this way, PCTA reduces the efficiency difference of usability evaluation between blind and sighted users.

In the study entitled "Web usability evaluation with screen reader users: Implementation of the Partial Concurrent Thinking Aloud technique" (Federici et al. 2010), we have proposed a modified protocol of usability evaluation technique for blind users, which integrates the features of the concurrent and the retrospective techniques. This new technique, called partial concurrent thinking aloud (PCTA), while respecting the properties of classic verbal protocols, overcomes the structural interference and the limits of concurrent and retrospective protocols when used with screen reader users. In order to facilitate understanding and acquisition of the PCTA's technique for practitioners and researchers, we have video recorded three different verbal protocols by visualizing five experimental sections. In the first two videos, we have compared a concurrent with a retrospective's verbal protocol of a sighted user, showing the difference of the verbalizations provided by the user in these two conditions. The third video shows the structural interference of the screen reader, during a blind user concurrent thinking aloud. In the last two videos, we show the difference of a blind user behaviour when PCTA or retrospective protocol is adopted. The videos clearly visualize the advantage of the PCTA use in respect of the two other protocols. In conclusion, the visualization of the PCTA technique confirms that this new verbal protocol promotes and guarantees a more user-driven usability assessment with disabled people, by better involving screen reader users, overcoming the structural interference and the limits of the concurrent and retrospective protocols.

Even though screen readers are a core accessibility tool for blind and low vision individuals (BLVIs), most visualizations are incompatible with screen readers. To improve accessible visualization experiences, we partnered with 10 BLV screen reader users (SRUs) in an iterative co-design study to design and develop accessible visualization experiences that afford SRUs the autonomy to interactively read and understand visualizations and their underlying data. During the five-month study, we explored accessible visualization prototypes with our design partners for three one-hour sessions. Our results provide feedback on the synthesized design concepts we explored, why (or why not) they aid comprehension and exploration for SRUs, and how differing design concepts can fit into cohesive accessible visualization experiences. We contribute both Chart Reader, a web-based accessibility engine resulting from our design iterations, and our distilled study findings—organized by design dimensions—in the creation of comprehensive accessible visualization experiences.

Participatory research methods are being used internationally to gather data on complex social, cultural, and political concerns that effect the use of technology [4]. Researchers have found it difficult to include people with disabilities in these studies [5, 6, 7]. The Accessible Learning Through Text-to-Speech Project will utilize online focus groups as a method of integrating people with disabilities into a participatory research project. The Alt-Learning Project will have three primary target populations; users of screen readers with vision, users of screen readers who are blind, and professionals responsible for the delivery of assistive technology. The online focus groups will allow the observation and collection of data as a participant would normally utilize their screen reader applications at home, school, or workplace.

Emoji are a popular, expressive form of non-verbal communication. However, people often use emoji in ways that result in confusing or cumbersome screen reader output. We created two accessibility support designs: (1) Preview, which displays a basic text transcript of a message with emoji that a screen reader would narrate, and (2) Alert, which summarises potential accessibility issues caused by emoji within a message. We explored our designs using an online survey and provided participants with the option to edit messages that contained emoji, should they choose to do so. We collected 1508 modified messages from 116 sighted participants and conducted a qualitative analysis of the data to identify the strategies participants used when asked to edit a message for accessibility issues and their appreciation of each design. We found that participants preferred the Preview design over Alert since it allows for subjective interpretations of what constitutes an accessible message. We report sighted users' rewriting strategies (e.g., editing the message to move the emoji to the end) and incorrect assumptions about screen readers that would lead to using textual markers that are incompatible with screen readers. We discuss the design implications for future systems for accessible messaging.

This article critically examines the promise of Internet-based digital technology to open up the world to people with disabilities, and the parallel danger that the social construction of disability in the digital environment will simply come to mirror pre-existing analogue discrimination. This paper explores how technologies and innovations designed to improve access by the disabled actually enhance access for all users. The first part of the paper focuses on ‘Web 2.0’ and digital access for people with disability, particularly those with vision impairment. The online software that drives the iPod and iPhone and exclusively delivers content to these devices is iTunes. While iTunes seems on the surface to provide enormous opportunity for the vision impaired to access a broad selection of audio content, its design actually works to inhibit access to the platform for this group. Apple promotes the use of iTunes in educational settings through the iTunes U channel, and this potentially excludes those who have difficulty with access to the technology. Critically, it is these excluded people who, potentially, could benefit the most from the new technology. We consider the difficulty experienced by users of screen readers and braille tablets in relation to iTunes and highlight the potential problems for universities who seek to utilise iTunes U. In the second part of the paper we reframe disability accessibility as a principle of universal access and design and outline how changes made to assist users with disability can enhance the learning experience of all students using the Lectopia lecture recording and distribution system as an example. The third section of the paper situates these digital developments within the continuum of disability theory deploying Finkelstein’s three stages of disability development. The focus then shifts to the potential of online virtual worlds such as Second Life to act as a place where the promise of technology to mediate for disability might be realised. Goggin and Newell suggest that the Internet will not be fully accessible until disability is considered a cultural identity in the same way that class, gender and sexuality are. This article argues that accessibility must be addressed through the context of design and shared open standards for digital platforms.

This study investigated the accessibility and usability of online job applications by individuals with visual impairments who use screen readers. Three blind, experienced screen reader users on the research team attempted to complete online job applications from 30 randomly selected Fortune 500 companies, with 90 application trials attempted. Each tester used a different screen reader and browser combination. The testers experienced significant barriers to completing the online job applications: 50 of 90 (55.6%) attempts were successful, but 23 of the 30 (76.7%) sites had critical issues that prevented at least one tester from completing the application. Testers found 694 accessibility issues and gave an average ease of use rating of 3.60 (SD=1.05) out of 5 for the job application sites. Twenty-six of the job application sites were created by eight job application software vendors, with significant variation in accessibility across different applications using the same vendor. The accessibility and usability issues identified with the majority of online job applications evaluated present an unnecessary barrier to employment for screen reader users. While the 55.6% success rate found in this study is considerably higher compared to previous research, only 23.3% of the job application sites were accessible to all three screen readers. Job application software vendors and companies that create their own online job applications should take a Universal Design approach by following the WCAG guidelines and implementing recommended solutions to increase the accessibility of their applications. Software vendors are encouraged to only offer accessible options for creating online job applications, such that companies would not be able to create an inaccessible form.

Graphical user web interfaces (GUIs) afford visual consumption and sensemaking of information, but present challenges for auditory, and often sequential, information seeking for people using screen readers. Information foraging theory illustrates that users' information behavior is guided by the use of information scent (mostly visual in GUIs) to assess value and cost of accessing information relevant to their goal, and rational decisions to maximize gain of information. Previous research about adaptive browsing behavior of screen reader users is associated with a lack of webpage usability. In this study, we observed and compared the information seeking behavior of ten sighted and ten screen reader users. Findings show that screen reader users demonstrate adapted mental models of the visual information search interface. Additionally, their adaptive search result exploration strategies in the context of query intent highlight key concern areas in specific parts of the search process.

Browsing the Web with screen readers can be difficult and frustrating. Web pages often contain inaccessible content that is expressed only visually or that can be accessed only with the mouse. Screen-reader users must also contend with usability challenges encountered when the reading content is designed with built-in assumptions of how it will be accessed -- generally by a sighted person on a standard display. Far from passive consumers of content who simply accept web content as accessible or not, many screen-reader users are adept at developing, discovering, and employing browsing strategies that help them overcome the accessibility and usability problems they encounter. In this paper, we overview the browsing strategies that we have observed screen-reader users employ when faced with challenges, ranging from unfamiliar web sites and complex web pages to dynamic and automatically-refreshing content. A better understanding of existing browsing strategies can inform the design of accessible websites, development of new tools that make experienced users more effective, and help overcome the initial learning curve for users who have not yet acquired effective browsing strategies.

Evaluating user experience (UX) during usability testing is an established practice leading to the design of more enjoyable information systems and products. Currently no published process or tool exists for UX evaluation for users with disabilities. Accessible User Experience (AUX) focuses on integrating accessibility into UX design to create enjoyable digital experiences for everyone, regardless of age or ability. With a view to developing an AUX evaluation tool and process, the emotional experiences of six blind individuals were explored through interviews along with hands-on sessions with websites/apps using laptops/phones. Comfort, Likability, Autonomy, Agency and Pleasure (constituting the CLAAP framework) were identified as dimensions for developing an AUX evaluation tool, which was tested with the interviewees. ‘Pleasure points’ were discovered as an alternative concept to ‘pain points.’ An inclusive process for conducting AUX studies with screen reader users was documented to support UX designers.