SlideShare uses cookies to improve functionality and performance, and to provide you with relevant advertising. If you continue browsing the site, you agree to the use of cookies on this website. See our User Agreement and Privacy Policy.
SlideShare uses cookies to improve functionality and performance, and to provide you with relevant advertising. If you continue browsing the site, you agree to the use of cookies on this website. See our Privacy Policy and User Agreement for details.
Successfully reported this slideshow.
Activate your 14 day free trial to unlock unlimited reading.
These are the slides of my PhD dissertation, entitle: "Assisted Interaction for Improving Web Accessibility: An Approach Driven and Tested by Users with Disabilities"
PhD Researcher at EGOKITUZ
at
University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU)
These are the slides of my PhD dissertation, entitle: "Assisted Interaction for Improving Web Accessibility: An Approach Driven and Tested by Users with Disabilities"
1.
Assisted Interaction for Improving Web
Accessibility: An Approach Driven and
Tested by Users with Disabilities
PhD Dissertation
Candidate: J. Eduardo Pérez
Supervisors: Myriam Arrue
Julio Abascal
Donostia/San Sebastian – Fri. 6 Nov., 2020
Informatika Fakultatea, Dept. of Computer Architecture and Technology
Laboratory of Human-Computer
Interaction for Special Needs
2.
Presentation Overview
• Part I: Introduction
– Motivation
– Approach
– Methodology
– General objectives
– Phases of the research
• Part II: A platform to assist user testing
– “Assisted Interaction Data Analysis of Web-Based User
Studies” (INTERACT 2015)
• Part III: An accessible platform for inclusive
in situ and remote experiments
– “Inclusive Web Empirical Studies in Remote and In-Situ
Settings: A User Evaluation of the RemoTest
Platform” (Int. J. of Human-Computer Interaction, Vol.
35, Issue 7, 2019)
• Part IV: Adaptations for touch screen
tablets
– “Adapting the Web for People With Upper Body Motor
Impairments Using Touch Screen Tablets” (Interacting
with Computers, Vol. 29, Issue 6, 2017)
• Part V: Adaptations for people with low
vision
– “An exploratory study of web adaptation techniques
for people with low vision” (Universal Access in the
Information Society, 2020)
• Part VI: Virtual cursors for people with
motor impairments
– “Evaluation of two virtual cursors for assisting web
access to people with motor impairments” (Int. J. of
Human-Computer Studies, Vol. 132, 2019)
• Part VII: Longitudinal study of both virtual
cursors
– “Longitudinal Study of Two Virtual Cursors for People
With Motor Impairments: A Performance and
Satisfaction Analysis on Web Navigation” (IEEE Access,
Vol. 8, 2020)
• Part VIII:
– Overall conclusions
– Main contributions
– Future work
2/43
3.
• Part I: Introduction
– Motivation
– Approach
– Methodology
– General objectives
– Phases of the research
• Part II: A platform to assist user testing
– “Assisted Interaction Data Analysis of Web-Based User
Studies” (INTERACT 2015)
• Part III: An accessible platform for inclusive
in situ and remote experiments
– “Inclusive Web Empirical Studies in Remote and In-Situ
Settings: A User Evaluation of the RemoTest
Platform” (Int. J. of Human-Computer Interaction, Vol.
35, Issue 7, 2019)
• Part IV: Adaptations for touch screen
tablets
– “Adapting the Web for People With Upper Body Motor
Impairments Using Touch Screen Tablets” (Interacting
with Computers, Vol. 29, Issue 6, 2017)
• Part V: Adaptations for people with low
vision
– “An exploratory study of web adaptation techniques
for people with low vision” (Universal Access in the
Information Society, 2020)
• Part VI: Virtual cursors for people with
motor impairments
– “Evaluation of two virtual cursors for assisting web
access to people with motor impairments” (Int. J. of
Human-Computer Studies, Vol. 132, 2019)
• Part VII: Longitudinal study of both virtual
cursors
– “Longitudinal Study of Two Virtual Cursors for People
With Motor Impairments: A Performance and
Satisfaction Analysis on Web Navigation” (IEEE Access,
Vol. 8, 2020)
• Part VIII: Final conclusions & future work
Presentation Overview
2/43
4.
Motivation
• The Web has become essential in our lives
• Potential to promote social inclusion and participation of people
with disabilities
• Many initiatives (guidelines, policies,…) to build accessible web
sites [1, 2, 3]
• Need for research on web accessibility:
- Majority of websites include a single design to fit all users
- Vast diversity within users with similar impairments
- Decline in productivity & satisfaction of users on web navigation
[1] “Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG 1.0, 2.0, 2.1),” by W3C (1999, 2008, 2018).
[2] “Accessibility of the websites and mobile applications of public sector bodies,” by European Union (2016).
[3] “Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973,” by US Congress (1998).
Part I – Introduction
3/43
5.
Approach
• Transcoding systems for web accessibility:
- Invented to help people with disabilities access inaccessible Web pages [1]
- Intermediary server to convert the content automatically without asking the author
- Need of an annotation process to achieve more complex adaptations
- Several examples of transcoding systems [2] mainly for people with visual impairments
• Virtual enhancements for assisting target selection:
- Assist the use of pointing devices to select, click, drag, etc., but also for tactile interaction
- Mainly aimed at users with motor impairments [3]
• Explore two disabilities:
- People with motor impairments (lack of dexterity in upper limbs)
- People with low vision
Part I – Introduction
[1] Asakawa et al. (2019) “Transcoding,” In Web Accessibility: A Foundation for Research.
[2] Asakawa & Itoh (1998) “User interface of a home page reader,” In ASSETS ’98.
[3] Trewin et al. (2006) “Developing steady clicks: a method of cursor assistance for people with motor impairments,” In ASSETS ’06. 4/43
6.
Methodology
① Observational studies of human behaviour and personal
interviews
- To identify web accessibility issues of target user populations
② Literature review
- To select appropriate guidelines, standards and techniques to support web accessibility
③ Follow usability and accessibility principles, as well as UCD
techniques
- To foster acceptance and compatibility of developed adaptation techniques and
interaction aids
④ Conduct user tests
- To evaluate proposed advancements: performance and satisfaction metrics
Part I – Introduction
5/43
7.
General Objectives
§ To analyse the needs of users with disabilities on the Web
§ To search adaptation techniques and alternative interaction
methods
§ To develop and test an evaluation tool to conduct user tests
and record user interactions
§ To develop technical aids (interface adaptations and other virtual
enhancements for target selection)
§ To test and evaluate the technical aids developed
§ To propose criteria to enhance web accessibility
Part I – Introduction
6/43
8.
Phases of the research
Remotest tool
conception,
development and
test
Point & click
assistance through
virtual cursors
UI adaptations
through
transcoding
II. Remotest
functionality
evaluation
III. Remotest
accessibility
evaluation
IV. Touch screen
for motor
impairment
V. Desktop for
low vision
VII. Longitudinal
study
VI. In situ
study
Part I – Introduction
7/43
9.
Overview
• Part I: Introduction
– Motivation
– Background
– Methodology
– Objectives
• Part II: A platform to assist web-based
user testing
– “Assisted Interaction Data Analysis of Web-Based User
Studies” (INTERACT 2015)
• Part III: An accessible platform for inclusive
in situ and remote experiments
– “Inclusive Web Empirical Studies in Remote and In-Situ
Settings: A User Evaluation of the RemoTest
Platform” (Int. J. of Human-Computer Interaction, Vol.
35, Issue 7, 2019)
• Part IV: Adaptations for touch screen
tablets
– “Adapting the Web for People With Upper Body Motor
Impairments Using Touch Screen Tablets” (Interacting
with Computers, Vol. 29, Issue 6, 2017)
• Part V: Adaptations for people with low
vision
– “An exploratory study of web adaptation techniques
for people with low vision” (Universal Access in the
Information Society, 2020)
• Part VI: Virtual cursors for people with
motor impairments
– “Evaluation of two virtual cursors for assisting web
access to people with motor impairments” (Int. J. of
Human-Computer Studies, Vol. 132, 2019)
• Part VII: Longitudinal study of both virtual
cursors
– “Longitudinal Study of Two Virtual Cursors for People
With Motor Impairments: A Performance and
Satisfaction Analysis on Web Navigation” (IEEE Access,
Vol. 8, 2020)
• Part VIII: Final conclusions & future work
8/43
10.
Rationale
Part II – “Assisted Interaction Data Analysis of Web-Based User Studies” (INTERACT 2015)
• Study user behaviour on the Web requires conducting
experimental sessions
• We built the RemoTest platform to assist experimenters with
remote and in situ experimental sessions
• In this paper we presented:
– A proof of concept developed to evaluate Remotest validity
• To define and conduct experiments with users
• To analyse the interaction data collected
9/43
11.
RemoTest platform
• Experimenter Module define all
components of experiments
• Coordinator Module stores &
manages experiments defined with
the Experimenter Module
Part II – “Assisted Interaction Data Analysis of Web-Based User Studies” (INTERACT 2015)
• Result Viewer Module organizes and
presents the abundant interaction
data gathered in an experiment,
provided by the Coordinator Module
• Participant Module add-on for
FireFox browser
10/43
12.
Objective & Methodology
• Objective:
– Compare results from manual video recording analysis about navigation
behaviours of participants with automatically calculated measures by
RemoTest
• Methodology:
– 16 participants
• 11 users with motor impairments and 5 without impairments
– 3 tasks:
• Filling a questionnaire about demographic data
• Free navigation task
• Searching task
Part II – “Assisted Interaction Data Analysis of Web-Based User Studies” (INTERACT 2015)
11/43
13.
Results & Conclusions
• RemoTest was successfully used
– To define and conduct the experimental sessions,
– To gather interaction data from participants
– To analyse interaction data
• Results automatically obtained were useful
– to characterize cursor movement and
– To identify profiles
Part II – “Assisted Interaction Data Analysis of Web-Based User Studies” (INTERACT 2015)
12/43
14.
Overview
• Part I: Introduction
– Motivation
– Background
– Methodology
– Objectives
• Part II: A platform to assist user testing
– “Assisted Interaction Data Analysis of Web-Based User
Studies” (INTERACT 2015)
• Part III: An accessible platform for
inclusive in situ and remote
experiments
– “Inclusive Web Empirical Studies in Remote and In-Situ
Settings: A User Evaluation of the RemoTest
Platform” (Int. J. of Human-Computer Interaction, Vol.
35, Issue 7, 2019)
• Part IV: Adaptations for touch screen
tablets
– “Adapting the Web for People With Upper Body Motor
Impairments Using Touch Screen Tablets” (Interacting
with Computers, Vol. 29, Issue 6, 2017)
• Part V: Adaptations for people with low
vision
– “An exploratory study of web adaptation techniques
for people with low vision” (Universal Access in the
Information Society, 2020)
• Part VI: Virtual cursors for people with
motor impairments
– “Evaluation of two virtual cursors for assisting web
access to people with motor impairments” (Int. J. of
Human-Computer Studies, Vol. 132, 2019)
• Part VII: Longitudinal study of both virtual
cursors
– “Longitudinal Study of Two Virtual Cursors for People
With Motor Impairments: A Performance and
Satisfaction Analysis on Web Navigation” (IEEE Access,
Vol. 8, 2020)
• Part VIII: Final conclusions & future work
13/43
15.
Rationale
Part III – “Inclusive Web Empirical Studies in Remote and In-Situ Settings: A User Evaluation of the RemoTest Platform” (IJHCI)
• To ensure RemoTest can be used remotely by a wide range of
users, needs to meet accessibility requirements
• In this paper we presented:
– Evaluation of environments created by RemoTest by mean of user
tests
– Installation, questionnaires and general satisfaction with the tool
14/43
16.
Methodology
Part III – “Inclusive Web Empirical Studies in Remote and In-Situ Settings: A User Evaluation of the RemoTest Platform” (IJHCI)
In situ study:
• 36 participants with different disabilities:
– 13 motor impairment, 10 blind, 8 low vision, and 5 without disabilities
– All had experience with computers and the Web
• 5 tasks:
– Installation, questionnaires, and web navigation tasks
• Data collection:
– Interaction data, video recordings, observations, and interviews
15/43
17.
Results & Conclusions
Part III – “Inclusive Web Empirical Studies in Remote and In-Situ Settings: A User Evaluation of the RemoTest Platform” (IJHCI)
• The RemoTest platform proved to be usable and accessible for
participants with different disabilities
• Stimuli generated by RemoTest proved to be accessible both in remote
and in situ contexts
• Improvements based on comments by participants
– Provide shortcuts
– Numbering the questions
– Clear instructions
– Larger text and controls
16/43
18.
Overview
• Part I: Introduction
– Motivation
– Background
– Methodology
– Objectives
• Part II: A platform to assist user testing
– “Assisted Interaction Data Analysis of Web-Based User
Studies” (INTERACT 2015)
• Part III: An accessible platform for inclusive
in situ and remote experiments
– “Inclusive Web Empirical Studies in Remote and In-Situ
Settings: A User Evaluation of the RemoTest
Platform” (Int. J. of Human-Computer Interaction, Vol.
35, Issue 7, 2019)
• Part IV: Adaptations for touch screen
tablets
– “Adapting the Web for People With Upper Body Motor
Impairments Using Touch Screen Tablets” (Interacting
with Computers, Vol. 29, Issue 6, 2017)
• Part V: Adaptations for people with low
vision
– “An exploratory study of web adaptation techniques
for people with low vision” (Universal Access in the
Information Society, 2020)
• Part VI: Virtual cursors for people with
motor impairments
– “Evaluation of two virtual cursors for assisting web
access to people with motor impairments” (Int. J. of
Human-Computer Studies, Vol. 132, 2019)
• Part VII: Longitudinal study of both virtual
cursors
– “Longitudinal Study of Two Virtual Cursors for People
With Motor Impairments: A Performance and
Satisfaction Analysis on Web Navigation” (IEEE Access,
Vol. 8, 2020)
• Part VIII: Final conclusions & future work
17/43
19.
Rationale
• People with disabilities face aggravated accessibility barriers
when accessing the Web from mobile devices
• In this paper we presented:
– A transcoding system that implements adaptations techniques for
assisting people with motor impairments on mobile devices
– Four alternative tactile interaction methods implemented to assist
them
– Evaluation of the enhancements proposed with eight users with motor
impairments
Part IV – “Adapting the Web for People With Upper Body Motor Impairments Using Touch Screen Tablets” (IwC)
18/43
20.
Transcoding tool architecture
• A transcoding system
composed of four modules
– Presentation
– Coordinator
– Knowledge base
– Adaptation
Part IV – “Adapting the Web for People With Upper Body Motor Impairments Using Touch Screen Tablets” (IwC)
19/43
21.
Methodology
• A formal evaluation with three main objectives:
– To collect general characteristics of the users
– To test different interaction techniques
– To measure the results of applying various adaptation techniques
• Participants:
– Eight users with motor impairments in upper limbs
– Two of them use regularly their own tablets or smartphones
• Experimental setting
– A Firefox Web browser with the RemoTest add-on presenting
stimuli and gathering interaction data from participants
• Tasks
– Phase 1: navigation tasks
– Phase 2: target acquisition tasks
Part IV – “Adapting the Web for People With Upper Body Motor Impairments Using Touch Screen Tablets” (IwC)
20/43
22.
Results & Conclusions
• Transcoded pages were revealed to be the preferred option
for most of the participants, as they require less physical
effort.
• Alternative interaction methods tested by motor impaired
users: ‘end tap’ and ‘steady tap’ proved to be helpful for
people with less finger movement control.
Part IV – “Adapting the Web for People With Upper Body Motor Impairments Using Touch Screen Tablets” (IwC)
21/43
23.
Overview
• Part I: Introduction
– Motivation
– Background
– Methodology
– Objectives
• Part II: A platform to assist user testing
– “Assisted Interaction Data Analysis of Web-Based User
Studies” (INTERACT 2015)
• Part III: An accessible platform for inclusive
in situ and remote experiments
– “Inclusive Web Empirical Studies in Remote and In-Situ
Settings: A User Evaluation of the RemoTest
Platform” (Int. J. of Human-Computer Interaction, Vol.
35, Issue 7, 2019)
• Part IV: Adaptations for touch screen
tablets
– “Adapting the Web for People With Upper Body Motor
Impairments Using Touch Screen Tablets” (Interacting
with Computers, Vol. 29, Issue 6, 2017)
• Part V: Adaptations for people with
low vision
– “An exploratory study of web adaptation techniques
for people with low vision” (Universal Access in the
Information Society, 2020)
• Part VI: Virtual cursors for people with
motor impairments
– “Evaluation of two virtual cursors for assisting web
access to people with motor impairments” (Int. J. of
Human-Computer Studies, Vol. 132, 2019)
• Part VII: Longitudinal study of both virtual
cursors
– “Longitudinal Study of Two Virtual Cursors for People
With Motor Impairments: A Performance and
Satisfaction Analysis on Web Navigation” (IEEE Access,
Vol. 8, 2020)
• Part VIII: Final conclusions & future work
22/43
24.
Rationale
• People with low vision rely on assistive technologies
(magnification, zooming) to access the Web
• However, zooming and magnification assistances entail other
accessibility issues for web browsing
• In this paper we presented:
– Literature review and an observational study to identify adaptations
techniques to assist people with low vision
– Results of an experimental session with 12 users with low vision to
evaluate these adaptations techniques
Part V – “An exploratory study of web adaptation techniques for people with low vision” (UAIS)
23/43
25.
Methodology
Part V – “An exploratory study of web adaptation techniques for people with low vision” (UAIS)
• First phase
– Literature review
– Observational study
• Second phase
– Exploratory Study
• Twelve participants with low vision having a high level of web navigation
expertise
• Conducted experimental sessions with adapted versions of the web
interfaces & gathered user interaction data
24/43
26.
Results & Conclusions
Part V – “An exploratory study of web adaptation techniques for people with low vision” (UAIS)
• The advantages of the adaptation techniques in relation to
the type of assistive technology used.
• Some adaptation techniques were helpful only for screen
magnifier users, but not for browser zoom users.
• New research hypotheses for a future experimental study
obtained.
25/43
27.
Overview
• Part I: Introduction
– Motivation
– Background
– Methodology
– Objectives
• Part II: A platform to assist user testing
– “Assisted Interaction Data Analysis of Web-Based User
Studies” (INTERACT 2015)
• Part III: An accessible platform for inclusive
in situ and remote experiments
– “Inclusive Web Empirical Studies in Remote and In-Situ
Settings: A User Evaluation of the RemoTest
Platform” (Int. J. of Human-Computer Interaction, Vol.
35, Issue 7, 2019)
• Part IV: Adaptations for touch screen
tablets
– “Adapting the Web for People With Upper Body Motor
Impairments Using Touch Screen Tablets” (Interacting
with Computers, Vol. 29, Issue 6, 2017)
• Part V: Adaptations for people with low
vision
– “An exploratory study of web adaptation techniques
for people with low vision” (Universal Access in the
Information Society, 2020)
• Part VI: Virtual cursors for people with
motor impairments
– “Evaluation of two virtual cursors for assisting web
access to people with motor impairments” (Int. J. of
Human-Computer Studies, Vol. 132, 2019)
• Part VII: Longitudinal study of both virtual
cursors
– “Longitudinal Study of Two Virtual Cursors for People
With Motor Impairments: A Performance and
Satisfaction Analysis on Web Navigation” (IEEE Access,
Vol. 8, 2020)
• Part VIII: Final conclusions & future work
26/43
28.
Rationale
Part VI – “Evaluation of two virtual cursors for assisting web access to people with motor impairments” (IJHCS)
• Link selection fundamental action for web browsing but
challenging for people with motor impairments
• Despite the many mouse alternatives, target selection is still
challenging for them
• Based on the literature and on previous studies we developed
and evaluated 2 virtual cursors to assist link selection:
– The cross cursor (keyboard based assistance)
– The area cursor (larger activation area)
27/43
29.
Virtual cursors
Part VI – “Evaluation of two virtual cursors for assisting web access to people with motor impairments” (IJHCS)
• Both virtual cursors developed as browser add-ons using JavaScript (handle
interactions and page content) and SVG (visual representation)
• The cross cursor:
– Combine cursor movement and one-
letter shortcuts to reduce trajectories
– Links at reach are those “crossed” by the
cross cursor
• The area cursor:
– Reduce accuracy required for clicking
links by providing a larger activation
area
– If more than one link within fixed size
activation area: selectable closest to
cursor
28/43
30.
Study
Part VI – “Evaluation of two virtual cursors for assisting web access to people with motor impairments” (IJHCS)
• 3 cursor variants (within-subjects design):
– cross cursor, area cursor, and original unassisted
• 15 participants:
– 9 with motor impairments
– Expert users with their pointing device
– Grouped based on pointing device:
• 2 websites used as stimuli:
– informational [discapnet.com] and institutional [gipuzkoa.eus]
• 2 kind of tasks:
– 4 searching tasks and 48 target acquisition tasks with each cursor variant
Area cursor
Cross cursor
Original cursor
JU group
KU group MU group
Keyboard group – KU Joystick & trackball group – JU Mouse group – MU
4 participants 5 participants 6 participants
29/43
31.
Measuring performance & satisfaction
Part VI – “Evaluation of two virtual cursors for assisting web access to people with motor impairments” (IJHCS)
• Six metrics to study performance on target acquisition tasks
based on cursor path evaluation:
– Movement time, pointing time, clicking time, distance travelled, curvature
index, and number of pauses
• Eight categories to ask about participants satisfaction with each
cursor variant:
– Learnable, easy to remember, accurate, easy to use, effortless, natural, fun,
and not frustrating
• Participants were also asked to rank all 3 variants from most to
least preferred choice for browsing the Web
30/43
32.
Results
Part VI – “Evaluation of two virtual cursors for assisting web access to people with motor impairments” (IJHCS)
Results of performance:
• Keyboard users group achieved the best results with
the cross cursor
31/43
33.
Results
Part VI – “Evaluation of two virtual cursors for assisting web access to people with motor impairments” (IJHCS)
Results of performance:
• Keyboard users group achieved the best results with
the cross cursor
• Joystick and trackball users group achieved better
results with the area cursor
31/43
34.
Results
Part VI – “Evaluation of two virtual cursors for assisting web access to people with motor impairments” (IJHCS)
Results of performance:
• Keyboard users group achieved the best results with
the cross cursor
• Joystick and trackball users group achieved better
results with the area cursor
• Mouse users group achieved similar results with both
cursors
31/43
35.
Results
Part VI – “Evaluation of two virtual cursors for assisting web access to people with motor impairments” (IJHCS)
Results of performance:
• Keyboard users group achieved the best results with
the cross cursor
• Joystick and trackball users group achieved better
results with the area cursor
• Mouse users group achieved similar results with both
cursors
Results of satisfaction
• Overall ranking – “preferred choice for web browsing”:
• Most participants with motor impairments (7 / 9) preferred one of the two
virtual cursor proposed
31/43
36.
Conclusions
Part VI – “Evaluation of two virtual cursors for assisting web access to people with motor impairments” (IJHCS)
• Virtual cursors tested proved to be beneficial for participants
with motor impairments
• Results showed improvements in their performance
• Keyboard users achieved best results with the cross cursor,
whereas joystick & trackball users with the area cursor.
• Promising results:
– need of personalized adaptations to assist point & click interactions
– they suggested a performance improvement with prolonged use of virtual
cursors
32/43
37.
Overview
• Part I: Introduction
– Motivation
– Background
– Methodology
– Objectives
• Part II: A platform to assist user testing
– “Assisted Interaction Data Analysis of Web-Based User
Studies” (INTERACT 2015)
• Part III: An accessible platform for inclusive
in situ and remote experiments
– “Inclusive Web Empirical Studies in Remote and In-Situ
Settings: A User Evaluation of the RemoTest
Platform” (Int. J. of Human-Computer Interaction, Vol.
35, Issue 7, 2019)
• Part IV: Adaptations for touch screen
tablets
– “Adapting the Web for People With Upper Body Motor
Impairments Using Touch Screen Tablets” (Interacting
with Computers, Vol. 29, Issue 6, 2017)
• Part V: Adaptations for people with low
vision
– “An exploratory study of web adaptation techniques
for people with low vision” (Universal Access in the
Information Society, 2020)
• Part VI: Virtual cursors for people with
motor impairments
– “Evaluation of two virtual cursors for assisting web
access to people with motor impairments” (Int. J. of
Human-Computer Studies, Vol. 132, 2019)
• Part VII: Longitudinal study of both
virtual cursors
– “Longitudinal Study of Two Virtual Cursors for People
With Motor Impairments: A Performance and
Satisfaction Analysis on Web Navigation” (IEEE Access,
Vol. 8, 2020)
• Part VIII: Final conclusions & future work
33/43
38.
Rationale
Part VII – “Longitudinal Study of Two Virtual Cursors for People With Motor Impairments: A Performance and Satisfaction Analysis on Web Navigation” (IEEE Access)
• Does continuous use …
… enhance the performance?
… affect satisfaction?
• We performed a longitudinal study to analyse:
– Learning effect
– Influence of distractors (other links) on target selection
– Satisfaction evolution over time
– Significance of results
34/43
39.
Study
• 2 pairs of cursors (between-subjects design):
– cross vs original cursor
– area vs original cursor
• 3 target configurations to study influence of
distractors
• 2 kind of tasks:
– Free navigation & Target acquisition task
• 8 participants with motor impairments:
– Expert users with their pointing device
– Grouped based on pointing device:
• 6 weeks long unsupervised study, from home
with their personal computers
Keyboard group – KU Joystick & trackball group – JU
4 participants 4 participants: 1 trackball + 3 joystick
Part VII – “Longitudinal Study of Two Virtual Cursors for People With Motor Impairments: A Performance and Satisfaction Analysis on Web Navigation” (IEEE Access)
Cross cursor Area cursor
Original cursor Original cursor
KU group JU group
3 target configurations to study influence of distractors
35/43
40.
Measurements
Part VII – “Longitudinal Study of Two Virtual Cursors for People With Motor Impairments: A Performance and Satisfaction Analysis on Web Navigation” (IEEE Access)
• Virtual cursors acceptance based on measures calculated from free
navigation
• Effective use of the virtual cursors based on target selection without
clicking over targets
• Seven metrics to study performance on target acquisition task
– Same 6 metrics from prev. study, plus target re-entry
– Also the throughput (TP) progression on target acquisition task over the course of the 15
sessions
• 10 items (SUS questionnaire) to rate (5-point Likert scale) participants
satisfaction with each cursor tested
36/43
41.
Results on performance
Part VII – “Longitudinal Study of Two Virtual Cursors for People With Motor Impairments: A Performance and Satisfaction Analysis on Web Navigation” (IEEE Access)
Users Movement
Time
Pointing
Time
Clicking
Time
Distance
travelled
Curvature
Index
No. of
pauses
Target
re-entry
Keyboard
3 Joystick
& 1 trackball
Users Movement
Time
Pointing
Time
Clicking
Time
Distance
travelled
Curvature
Index
No. of
pauses
Target
re-entry
Keyboard
3 Joystick
& 1 trackball
Users Movement
Time
Pointing
Time
Clicking
Time
Distance
travelled
Curvature
Index
No. of
pauses
Target
re-entry
Keyboard
3 Joystick
& 1 trackball
Target configuration 1 – close distractors
Target configuration 2 – distant distractors
Target configuration 3 – without distractors
37/43
42.
Conclusions
Part VII – “Longitudinal Study of Two Virtual Cursors for People With Motor Impairments: A Performance and Satisfaction Analysis on Web Navigation” (IEEE Access)
• Both virtual cursors improved the performance of each group:
– The cross cursor to keyboard users
– The area cursor to joystick and trackball users
• Positive scores on satisfaction after a prolonged use
– Keyboard users improved SUS score (90/100 è 93.1/100)
• Improvements suggested:
– To reduce the clicking time
– To improve performance of the standard area cursor with closely spaced links
38/43
43.
Overview
• Part I: Introduction
– Motivation
– Background
– Methodology
– Objectives
• Part II: A platform to assist user testing
– “Assisted Interaction Data Analysis of Web-Based User
Studies” (INTERACT 2015)
• Part III: An accessible platform for inclusive
in situ and remote experiments
– “Inclusive Web Empirical Studies in Remote and In-Situ
Settings: A User Evaluation of the RemoTest
Platform” (Int. J. of Human-Computer Interaction, Vol.
35, Issue 7, 2019)
• Part IV: Adaptations for touch screen
tablets
– “Adapting the Web for People With Upper Body Motor
Impairments Using Touch Screen Tablets” (Interacting
with Computers, Vol. 29, Issue 6, 2017)
• Part V: Adaptations for people with low
vision
– “An exploratory study of web adaptation techniques for people
with low vision” (Universal Access in the Information Society,
2020)
• Part VI: Virtual cursors for people with
motor impairments
– “Evaluation of two virtual cursors for assisting web access to
people with motor impairments” (Int. J. of Human-Computer
Studies, Vol. 132, 2019)
• Part VII: Longitudinal study of both virtual
cursors
– “Longitudinal Study of Two Virtual Cursors for People With Motor
Impairments: A Performance and Satisfaction Analysis on Web
Navigation”
(IEEE Access, Vol. 8, 2020)
• Part VIII: Final conclusions & future
work
39/43
44.
Overall conclusions
• Methodology applied was valid for improving web
accessibility to different groups of users with special needs
• Technical aids tested improved web access to specific groups
of users.
– Assistive technology used (screen magnifiers or alternative pointing
devices) was a determining factor to select the most appropriate.
Part VIII – Conclusions & future work
40/43
45.
Overall conclusions
• In addition to performance measures, valuable information
from interviews with participants to improve techniques
proposed
• Longitudinal study (remote and unsupervised) provided
insight that could not be obtained from the other studies
– More valuable and natural interaction data from unsupervised
navigation
– Technology acceptance based on habits of use
– Greater amount of data to analyse significance of results
– Continuous monitoring allow to analyse the learning effect
Part VIII – Conclusions & future work
41/43
46.
Main contributions
• A platform for conducting formal web-based user studies has
been developed
• A new heuristic method for delimiting point and click cursor
trajectories for link selection has been defined
• Additional knowledge about what difficulties are encountered
in the Web by different groups of users has been provided
• Keyboard-only users with the novel cross cursor significantly
improved their performance has been proved
Part VIII – Conclusions & future work
42/43
47.
Future work
Part VIII – Conclusions & future work
• To develop downloadable versions of technical aids.
• To apply same methodology to other groups of users (e.g., people
with intellectual impairments), and to other contexts (e.g.,
smartphones)
• To investigate alternatives, such as crowdsourcing or gamification
techniques, to speed up the annotation process
• To investigate point & click over other interaction components
(e.g., opening dropdown menus, filling forms, etc.)
43/43
48.
Assisted Interaction for Improving Web
Accessibility: An Approach Driven and
Tested by Users with Disabilities
Thank you for your attention
Donostia/San Sebastian – Fri. 6 Nov., 2020
Informatika Fakultatea, Dept. of Computer Architecture and Technology
Laboratory of Human-Computer
Interaction for Special Needs
0 likes
Be the first to like this
Views
Total views
56
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
8
You have now unlocked unlimited access to 20M+ documents!
Unlimited Reading
Learn faster and smarter from top experts
Unlimited Downloading
Download to take your learnings offline and on the go
You also get free access to Scribd!
Instant access to millions of ebooks, audiobooks, magazines, podcasts and more.
Read and listen offline with any device.
Free access to premium services like Tuneln, Mubi and more.