Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
2
Know Your Users
 Graduate student
 Online class
 Has a disability
 Asked more time with his projects
 Written work is...
The outcome?
4
Designing for People
with Cognitive Disabilities in
Language and Literacy
Yulia Nemchinova, DCD
Northrop Grumman and
Unive...
Expectations
 Web Applications
 Kiosks
 In-person
 Phone
 Print Publications
6
Who Has Cognitive Disabilities
 Seven percent of the population in the
US have some type of cognitive,
mental or emotiona...
Clinical Diagnoses
 Attention disorders
 Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)
 Developmental disabilities
 Cognitive issues re...
Functional Impact
 Memory
 Attention
 Problem solving
 Language and reading
 Mathematical thinking
 Visual and spati...
Why Are We So Behind?
Cognitive impairments are often:
 Invisible
 Difficult to diagnose
 Not universally defined
 Not...
11
A Bit of History
 Willowbrook State School
12
When Users Encounter
Obstacles…
 Lack of confirmation that their
action was correct
 Cannot find and review features
 C...
When Users Encounter
Obstacles…
 It is a work around for most
users
 It is a real showstopper for many
users with cognit...
What can we do?
15
Support Assistive Technologies
 Screen readers
 Screen magnifiers
 Voice recognition
 Software for reading & writing h...
17
18
19
Universal Design
20
Universal Design
 Assist most users
 One implementation
21
Universal Design: Navigation
 Consistent navigation and design
 Flat architecture
 Functioning Back button
 Limited th...
Universal Design: Content for
Mobile
 Direct access to content
 Limited content to process
 Availability on any screen ...
24
Language & Literacy
 Clear and simple text
 6-8 reading level
 Short pages, paragraphs and
sentences
 Single column of...
Dyslexia
 http://youtu.be/8m1fCz3ohMw
26
27
Targeted Support
Universal Design: Navigation
 Consistent navigation and design on
every page
 Flat navigational architecture
 Functioni...
Mobile or Slimmed Down Access
 Direct access to content
 Limited content to process
 Availability on multiple electroni...
Finnish Usability Study
 An investigation how students with
cognitive disabilities use computers
 Participants: students...
Usability Testing
 Usability studies with cognitively
impaired people are extremely rare
 User testing is needed
 There...
Take Aways
 Think universal design
 Explore possibilities for user testing
 Apply language and literacy guidelines
32
The Future: GPII
 Global Public Inclusive Infrastructure
(GPII)
33
34
Thank you!
35
References:
36
Bergel, M., Chadwick-Dias, A., & Tullis, T. (2005). Leveraging Universal Design
in a Financial Services Com...
References (contd.):
37
Francik, E., Levine, S., Tremain, S., Roberts, E., & Bayha, B. (1999).
Telecommunications Problems...
References (contd.):
38
Jansche, M., Feng, L., & Huenerfauth, M. (2010). Reading Difficulty in Adults
with Intellectual Di...
References (contd.):
39
Lewis, C. (2006, May-June). HCI and Cognitive Disabilities. Interactions , pp.
14-15.
Lewis, C. HC...
References (contd.):
40
Redish, J. (., & Chisnell, D. (2004). Designing Web Sites for Older Adults: A
Review of Recent Lit...
References (contd.):
41
Vigouroux, N., Rumeau, P., Vella, F., & Vellas, B. (2009). Studying Point-Select-
Drag Interaction...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Designing for People with Cognitive Disabilities in Language and Literacy

1,496 views

Published on

UXPA 2013 Annual Conference Wednesday July 10, 2013 11:00am - 12:00pm ET by Yulia Nemchinova

The importance of accommodating visually impaired Web users is now widely recognized - yet cognitively impaired users are still largely left behind. Cognitive disabilities include conditions such as learning and language disabilities, attention disorders, traumatic brain injury, mental retardation, autism, cerebral palsy, cognitive issues related to aging and more. The broad spectrum of cognitive issues and lack of user research and evaluation pose immense and important challenges to us as UX practitioners. This presentation addresses design for this diverse user group, with a special focus on language and literacy disabilities fairly common in both adults and kids.

Published in: Technology, Design
  • Be the first to comment

Designing for People with Cognitive Disabilities in Language and Literacy

  1. 1. 2
  2. 2. Know Your Users  Graduate student  Online class  Has a disability  Asked more time with his projects  Written work is incoherent  Large fonts 3
  3. 3. The outcome? 4
  4. 4. Designing for People with Cognitive Disabilities in Language and Literacy Yulia Nemchinova, DCD Northrop Grumman and University of Maryland University College UXPA 2013, Washington DC
  5. 5. Expectations  Web Applications  Kiosks  In-person  Phone  Print Publications 6
  6. 6. Who Has Cognitive Disabilities  Seven percent of the population in the US have some type of cognitive, mental or emotional impairment. (Census 2010) 7
  7. 7. Clinical Diagnoses  Attention disorders  Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)  Developmental disabilities  Cognitive issues related to aging  Learning and language disabilities, including dyslexia 8
  8. 8. Functional Impact  Memory  Attention  Problem solving  Language and reading  Mathematical thinking  Visual and spatial perception 9
  9. 9. Why Are We So Behind? Cognitive impairments are often:  Invisible  Difficult to diagnose  Not universally defined  Not willingly disclosed and  Can be combined with other disabilities 10
  10. 10. 11
  11. 11. A Bit of History  Willowbrook State School 12
  12. 12. When Users Encounter Obstacles…  Lack of confirmation that their action was correct  Cannot find and review features  Cannot recover from errors  Cannot find landmarks  Do not have enough time to complete tasks  Cannot save their work at any time… 13
  13. 13. When Users Encounter Obstacles…  It is a work around for most users  It is a real showstopper for many users with cognitive impairments 14
  14. 14. What can we do? 15
  15. 15. Support Assistive Technologies  Screen readers  Screen magnifiers  Voice recognition  Software for reading & writing help 16
  16. 16. 17
  17. 17. 18
  18. 18. 19
  19. 19. Universal Design 20
  20. 20. Universal Design  Assist most users  One implementation 21
  21. 21. Universal Design: Navigation  Consistent navigation and design  Flat architecture  Functioning Back button  Limited the number of links per page  Standard behavior for links 22
  22. 22. Universal Design: Content for Mobile  Direct access to content  Limited content to process  Availability on any screen size 23
  23. 23. 24
  24. 24. Language & Literacy  Clear and simple text  6-8 reading level  Short pages, paragraphs and sentences  Single column of content  Shorter words are not always better comprehended 25
  25. 25. Dyslexia  http://youtu.be/8m1fCz3ohMw 26
  26. 26. 27 Targeted Support
  27. 27. Universal Design: Navigation  Consistent navigation and design on every page  Flat navigational architecture  Functioning Back button  Limited the number of links per page  Standard behavior for links 28
  28. 28. Mobile or Slimmed Down Access  Direct access to content  Limited content to process  Availability on multiple electronic devices 29
  29. 29. Finnish Usability Study  An investigation how students with cognitive disabilities use computers  Participants: students with mild intellectual disabilities, limited reading and writing skills  Application: a familiar (used for about 1.5 year) email application  Method: an informal walkthrough with elements of contextual inquiry  Recommendation: inclusion of users with cognitive problems as participants as well as reviewers 30
  30. 30. Usability Testing  Usability studies with cognitively impaired people are extremely rare  User testing is needed  There is no substitution for actual users with disabilities 31
  31. 31. Take Aways  Think universal design  Explore possibilities for user testing  Apply language and literacy guidelines 32
  32. 32. The Future: GPII  Global Public Inclusive Infrastructure (GPII) 33
  33. 33. 34
  34. 34. Thank you! 35
  35. 35. References: 36 Bergel, M., Chadwick-Dias, A., & Tullis, T. (2005). Leveraging Universal Design in a Financial Services Company. Accessibility and Computing, 82. Bodine, C., & Lewis, C. (2004). Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center (RERC) for the Advancement of Cognitive Technologies. Accessibility and Computing, 80. Cole, E. (2011). Lessons Learned and Challenges Discovered in Developing Cognitive Technology for Individuals with Brain Injury. Proceeding of CHI 2011. Czaja, S. J., Gregor, P., & Hanson, V. L. (2009). Introduction to the special issue on aging and information technology. ACM Trans. Access. Comput, 4. Fernando, S., Elliman, T., Money, A., & Lines, L. (2009). Age Related Cognitive Impairments and Diffusion of Assistive Web-Base Technologies. Universal Access in HCI, Part I, HCII 2009 (pp. 353-360). Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.
  36. 36. References (contd.): 37 Francik, E., Levine, S., Tremain, S., Roberts, E., & Bayha, B. (1999). Telecommunications Problems and Design Strategies for People with Cognitive Disabilities. Annotated Bibliography and Research Recommendations, World Institute on Disability. Gordon, W. A., & Nash, J. (2005). The Interface Between Cognitive Impairments and Access to Information Technology. Gregor, P., & Dickinson, A. (2006). Cognitive difficulties and access to information systems – an interaction design perspective. Hagood, K., Moore, T., Pierre, T., Messamer, P., Ramsberger, G., & Lewis, C. (2010). Naming Practice for People with Aphasia in a Mobile Web Application: Early User Experience. ASSETS: ACM Conference on Assistive Technologies, 273-274. Hanson, V. L. (2009). Cognition, Age, and Web Browsing. Universal Access in HCI, Part I, HCII 2009, (pp. 245-250). Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.
  37. 37. References (contd.): 38 Jansche, M., Feng, L., & Huenerfauth, M. (2010). Reading Difficulty in Adults with Intellectual Disabilities: Analysis with a Hierarchical Latent Trait Model. ASSETS’10,. Orlando, Florida, USA. Judson, A., & Nicolle, C. (2004). Internet accessibility for people who use augmentative and alternative communication. Conference Proceedings -- International Society for Augmentative & Alternative Communication, 181-186. Keates, S., Kozloski, J., & Varker, P. (2009). Cognitive Impairments, HCI and Daily Living. Universal Access in HCI, Part I, HCII 2009 (pp. 366-374). Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg. Lepistö, A., & Ovaska, S. (2004). Usability evaluation involving participants with cognitive disabilities. NordiCHI '04. Tampere, Finland. Lewis, C. Cognitive and Learning Impairments. Lewis, C. (2008). Cognitive Disabilities. In The Universal Access Handbook.
  38. 38. References (contd.): 39 Lewis, C. (2006, May-June). HCI and Cognitive Disabilities. Interactions , pp. 14-15. Lewis, C. HCI for People with Cognitive Disabilities. Lewis, C. (2006). Simplicity in cognitive assistive technology: a framework and agenda for research. Univ Access Inf Soc (pp. 351-361). Springer-Verlag. Moffatt, K., & Davies, R. (2004). The Aphasia Project: Designing technology for and with individuals who have aphasia. Accessibility and Computing, 80, pp. 11-17. Poncelas, A., & Murphy, G. (2007). Accessible Information for People with Intellectual Disabilities: Do Symbols Really Help? Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities. 20, pp. 466-474. BILD Publications. Poulson, D., & Nicolle, C. (2004). Making the Internet accessible for people with cognitive and communication Impairments. Universal Access in the Information Society, 3(1), 48-56.
  39. 39. References (contd.): 40 Redish, J. (., & Chisnell, D. (2004). Designing Web Sites for Older Adults: A Review of Recent Literature. AARP. Rowland, C. (2010). Accessibility: The Need for Champions and Awareness in Higher Education. Educause Review, 45(6), 12. Rowland, C. (2010). Transforming the Institution. Educause Review, 45(6), 14. Savidis, A., & Stephanidis, C. (2004). Developing Inclusive e-Learning and e- Entertainment to Effectively Accommodate Learning Difficulties., (pp. 42-54). Solheim, I. (2009). Adaptive User Interfaces: Benefit or Impediment for Lower- Literacy Users? Universal Access in HCI, Part II, HCII 2009 (pp. 758-765). Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg. Summers, K., & Summers, M. (2005). Reading and Navigational Strategies of Web Users with Lower Literacy Skills. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 42.
  40. 40. References (contd.): 41 Vigouroux, N., Rumeau, P., Vella, F., & Vellas, B. (2009). Studying Point-Select- Drag Interaction Techniques for Older People with Cognitive Impairment. Universal Access in HCI, Part I, HCII 2009 (pp. 422-428). Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg. Walser, K., Quesenbery, W., & Swierenga, S. (2008). Designing for Cognitive Disabilities. UPA 2008 – The Many Faces of User Experience. Baltimore, Maryland, USA. WebAIM. (n.d.). Cognitive and Learning Disabilities Literature Review. Retrieved from WebAIM Web Accessibility in Mind: http://webaim.org/projects/steppingstones/litreviewsummary WebAIM. (n.d.). Steppingstones Project on Web Accessibility and Cognitive Disabilities in Education. Retrieved from WebAIM Web Accessibility in Mind: http://webaim.org/projects/steppingstones/steppingstones

×