Disabled ‘R’ All: Bridging the gap between Accessibility and Usability

552 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Health & Medicine
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
552
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Disabled ‘R’ All: Bridging the gap between Accessibility and Usability

  1. 1. Disabled ‘R’ All Bridging the gap betweenAccessibility and Usability Hugo Nicolau hman@vimmi.inesc-id.pt
  2. 2. Mobile devices
  3. 3. Powerful tools
  4. 4. Always near us
  5. 5. @ Home
  6. 6. @ Work
  7. 7. Outdoors
  8. 8. In car
  9. 9. @ Coffee shop
  10. 10. @ Subway
  11. 11. @ Airplain
  12. 12. And many many others …
  13. 13. Many contexts CONTEXT
  14. 14. Overload
  15. 15. Leading to … SIID
  16. 16. Motor capabilities
  17. 17. Loss of physical stability
  18. 18. Motor impaired
  19. 19. Similar problems?
  20. 20. Do they benefit from … Similar solutions?
  21. 21. Goal
  22. 22. Hypothesis“Solutions designed for motor-impaired userscan be applied on mobile devices by assessingthe users’ capabilities within real mobilecontexts and thus enhancing their performance ”
  23. 23. Knowledge sharing and reuse
  24. 24. “Reinventing the wheel”
  25. 25. More and better research
  26. 26. Cost and availability
  27. 27. New connotation
  28. 28. RELATED WORK
  29. 29. Context Sears, 2003
  30. 30. Understanding SIID
  31. 31. Brewster, 2002 + 17% workload -32% data entered
  32. 32. Lin et al., 2007 Error rate 65% - 3%
  33. 33. Schedlbauer et al., 2007
  34. 34. Schildbach et al., 2010
  35. 35. Mizobuchi, 2005
  36. 36. Dealing with SIID(Harrison et al., 2010) (Mistry et al., 2009)(Sawheny and Schmandt, 2000) (Wigdor and Balakrisham, 2003)
  37. 37. Karlson, 2007; Baudisch, 2009ThumbSpace(Karlson and Bederson, 2007) (Baudisch and Chu, 2009)
  38. 38. Context-aware interfaces (Kane et al., 2008)
  39. 39. Alternative techniques (Yatani and Troung, 2009)
  40. 40. Gesture interfaces (Yfantidis, 2006) (Bach, 2008) (Guerreiro, 2009) (Goldberg, 1993)
  41. 41. Discussion on SIID
  42. 42. Target selection
  43. 43. Text-entry
  44. 44. Increase size
  45. 45. Evaluation
  46. 46. Still in its infancy
  47. 47. Understanding HIID
  48. 48. Dropping and long pressDroppingLong press > ffffffffffffff (Brown, 1992)
  49. 49. Bounce and additional pressAdditionalBounce(Vanderheiden, 1993; Edwards, 1995; Poulson et al. 1996)
  50. 50. Trewin, 1999 Transposed Remote Bounce Dropping Missing Additional Long 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
  51. 51. Mouse manipulation(Riviere and Thakor, 1996; Hwang et al. 2004; Keates et al.,2005) Near misses Not-so-near misses Slips Accidental clicks Middle button press
  52. 52. Touch screens (Guerreiro et al., 2010)
  53. 53. Dealing with HIID
  54. 54. Edge-based interfaces Barrier Pointing EdgeWrite (Froehlich et al., 2007) (Wobbrock et al., 2003)
  55. 55. PointingSUPPLE Steady Clicks(Gajos et al., 2007) (Trewin et al., 2006)
  56. 56. Text-Entry solutionsFiltersSuggestion and configuration systemsWord correction and prediction systemsAlternative techniques
  57. 57. Filters Windows Sticky keys Slow keys OverlapKeys Repeat keys Mouse keys (Trewin, 2002)
  58. 58. Suggestion systems (Trewin and Pain, 1997) (Koester et al., 2007)
  59. 59. Word correction True Keys (Kane et al., 2008)
  60. 60. Alternative techniquesSpread Keys(Merlin and Raynal, 2010) EdgeWrite (Wobbrock et al., 2003)
  61. 61. Discussion HIID
  62. 62. Greater focus on problems
  63. 63. Reuse “soft-solutions”
  64. 64. Opportunities
  65. 65. APPROACH
  66. 66. Similar approaches
  67. 67. Focus on disability
  68. 68. Rather than … Ability
  69. 69. Touch screens
  70. 70. Preliminary studies (Guerreiro et al., 2010)
  71. 71. Tapping
  72. 72. Crossing
  73. 73. Exiting
  74. 74. Gesturing
  75. 75. Size 7 mm 12 mm 17 mm
  76. 76. Screen areas
  77. 77. Tapping
  78. 78. Size 12 mm 22%
  79. 79. Near support
  80. 80. Ability-design
  81. 81. WorkplanHow do users select Selection techniques fortargets? touch screens Text-entry Text-entrySimilar problems? errors (HIID) errors (SIID)What solutions? DevelopmentSimilar solutions? Evaluation
  82. 82. TappingHow do users select Selection techniques fortargets? touch screens Text-entry Text-entrySimilar problems? errors (HIID) errors (SIID)What solutions? DevelopmentSimilar solutions? Evaluation
  83. 83. Similar problems?How do users select Selection techniques fortargets? touch screens Text-entry Text-entrySimilar problems? errors (HIID) errors (SIID)What solutions? DevelopmentSimilar solutions? Evaluation
  84. 84. Text-entry
  85. 85. Capture abilities
  86. 86. HIID
  87. 87. SIID
  88. 88. ComparisonIntra analysisInter analysis
  89. 89. What solutions?How do users select Selection techniques fortargets? touch screens Text-entry Text-entrySimilar problems? errors (HIID) errors (SIID)What solutions? DevelopmentSimilar solutions? Evaluation
  90. 90. Three to five solutionsFiltersConfiguration and suggestion systemsOrthographic correctorsAlternative techniques
  91. 91. Development
  92. 92. Similar solutions?How do users select Selection techniques fortargets? touch screens Text-entry Text-entrySimilar problems? errors (HIID) errors (SIID)What solutions? DevelopmentSimilar solutions? Evaluation
  93. 93. Hypothesis validation“Solutions designed for motor-impaired userscan be applied on mobile devices by assessingthe users’ capabilities within real mobilecontexts and thus enhancing their performance ”
  94. 94. Most adequate solutions 100 Error rate (%) 2x 2x 0 Physical Impaired Situational Impaired Traditional Alternative
  95. 95. Expected contributions1. Analysis of selection techniques2. Identify text-entry difficulties for motor impaired users3. Performance analysis whilst mobile4. Mobile prototypes for text-entry tasks5. User study with accessibility solutions6. Guidelines for technology transfer
  96. 96. Expected Results1. Similar selection techniques2. Relationship between physical and situational impairments3. Solutions can be transferred between user groups
  97. 97. Workplan
  98. 98. Expected publications2010: Full paper – ASSETS’10 Short paper – Mobile HCI’102011: Doctoral consortium – ASSETS ‘11 Journal paper2012: Full paper – ASSETS’12 Full paper – Mobile HCI’122013: Full paper – ASSETS’13 Full paper – CHI’13
  99. 99. THE ENDHugo Nicolauhman@vimmi.inesc-id.pt
  100. 100. Questions

×