Assignment Writing Service http://HelpWriting.net/A-Critical-Review-Of-Research-On-Websit 👈

1. 1
A Critical Review of Research on Websites Development and Design
Related to Diversity Issues.
Siti Zakiah Syed Mustafa* & Shahren Ahmad Zaidi Adruce
Cognitive Science Department
Faculty of Cognitive Sciences and Human Development
University of Malaysia Sarawak.
email:sitizakiah.syedmustafa@gmail.com
Abstract
Internet users reaching millions worldwide and expecting to increase more over the years is
a sign for websites as the crucial medium of information transmission and dissemination. In
the view of the diverse nature of human being, an identical website design is not possible to
facilitate the demand of human diversity. Current paper purposes to review previous studies
that have been done in the field of web development and design related to diversity. As the
result, literatures either proposed sets of guidelines/recommendations or assistive
technologies particularly web interfaces, adaptive systems or web devices to accommodate
the differences in human. Some of the literatures employed specific theories in proposing
solutions and some are based on participant involvement during the processes. This study is
as a reference for researches conducting studies on web development and design related to
human diversity issues.
1. Introduction
The World Wide Web is estimated to double in size roughly every two to three months
and since 1998 internet usage has grown at a rate of 20% per year[1]
. Computer Industry,
Almanac estimates the Internet users population reach 934 million people worldwide in 2004,
and is likely to increase to 1.35 billion in 2007[1]
. In the last decade, the number and
complexity of websites and the amount of information they offer is rapidly growing.
Websites typically serve large and heterogeneous audience which can lead to maintenance
and usability problems[2]
. Web has been defined as the archetypal „information space‟, a
combination of content and presentation that allows people to plan, monitor and control their
activities that it is impossible to design a site so that all the information needs of all the users
of the site are satisfied on a single screen[3]
. The World Wide Web is an important tool used
for a number of purposes, from entertainment-based browsing and casual shopping to
scientific and technical research[4]
. Although the Web has no borders but linguistic, cultural,
technological and legal barriers have been identified by the Web authors as challenges to
reach a truly worldwide audience[4]
. Literatures on website development emphasis the vitality
to localize global website i.e. to adapt the website to a group characteristics to attract and
retain more customers[5]
. To date, none review articles provide exclusive review on web
based technology related to diversity issues have been published. The objective of this paper
is to review studies that have been done in the field of human differences in web based
technology. In particular, this paper is to review number of articles on web development and
design related to diversity issues published according to year, to study databases contains

2. 2
articles related to human diversity in web development and design, to identify theories that
have been applied in the researches, to investigate method proposed by the researches to
accommodate with particular human differences, to key out gaps in previous research for
future research to take on. This study serves reference for researchers who conducted
research in field of web development and design related to diversity issues.
1.1 Definition of Human Diversity
Concept of diversity referred as “the all inclusive, collective mixture of human
differences and similarities along a given dimension”[6]
whereas defined in publication for
The Pennsylvania State University as differences by people[7]
. Dimensions of diversity
include gender, sexual preference, age, disability, educational background, socioeconomic
factors, work experience/ professional background, personality type and other demographic
characteristics[6]
. Dimensions of diversity also listed as following : gender, race, ethnicity,
age, physical and mental ability, sexual orientation, language, veteran status, religious beliefs,
marital status, parental status, education, income, occupation and geographic location[7]
.
Another study listed dimensions of diversity including learning styles, age, educational
background, social class, language, gender, level of study, generational background, degree
of life experience, attitudes towards education, religion, knowledge, expectations and
attitudes, capacity of understanding and socio-economic status[8]
.
1.2 State of research
This paper is to present an exclusive overview of the current state of research on
websites development and design related to diversity issues. Four databases namely Google
Scholars, Citeseerx, IEEE and Science Direct provide the source material for the research
conducted in this paper. The literature review was initiated by conducting a literature search
in the Google Scholars database starting July 2011. It was searched for articles by the
keywords “human diversity + website” and “individual differences + website” which
included those words in the title since these were assumed to examine some aspect of
websites related to human diversity. In total, 2610 articles that included “human diversity”
and “website” in the title were identified and 25100 articles that included “individual
differences” and “website” were identified. Of these, two articles from the early mentioned
keyword and three articles from the latter were examined. Then, literature searches were
conducted by using the Citeseerx database followed by IEEE and Science Direct. In total,
three articles were selected from Citeseerx, two articles from IEEE and three articles from
Science Direct.
In the second phase of review, new articles were searched in Google Scholars,
Citeseerx, IEEE and Science Direct databases by using keyword which included each of the
dimensions (as listed in paper found during first phase) plus the word “website” e.g. “age +
website”, “culture + website”, “gender + website” and followed by other identified
dimensions of human diversity. In total, 57 articles were selected in this phase. All together,
70 articles from various dimensions of diversity were examined.
Table 1 Representation of diversity and locality of articles selected for review.
No. Author Diversity Locality
1 Zaphiris & Savitch (2008) age London
2 Arch (2009) age France

3. 3
3 Arnott et al. (2004) age UK
4 Becker (2004) age Florida
5 Borse et al. (2005) age not specified
6 Capozzo et al. (2008) age not specified
7 Chadwick-Dias (2003) age Boston
8 Chadwick-Dias (2004) age Boston
9 Djamasbi et al. (2008) age not specified
10 Fernando et al. (2008) age Dubai, UK, Norway, Italy.
11 Fukuda et al. (2003) age Germany
12 Hanson (2009) age Scotland
13 Hart (2004) age US
14 Large et al. (2002) age Canada
15 Redish et al. (2004) age not specified
16 Zaphiris et al. (2008) age UK
17 Zhao et al. (2003) culture US & China
18 Stengers et al. (2003) culture Belgium
19 Wan Abdul Rahim et al.
(2007)
culture Malaysia
20 Smith et al. (2001) culture not specified
21 Marcus et al. (2009) culture Jordan. Egypt and UAE
22 Makki et al. (2006) culture
23 Marcus et al. (2000) culture
24 Khashman et al. (2010) culture Algeria, Bahrain, Egypt, Iraq,
Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya,
Morocco, Oman, Qatar, Saudi
Arabia, Syria, Tunisia and
Yemen
25 Li et al. (2007) culture not specified
26 Jagne et al. (n.d.) culture not specified
27 Hartnett et al. (2007) culture not specified
28 Goold et al. (2007) culture Australia
29 Duygu et al. (2009) culture not specified
30 Cyr et al. (2004) culture German, Japan & US
31 Dirscherl et al. (2004) culture USA, UK, Spain & Hungary
32 Cyr et al. (2004) personality types US, Canada, Germany & Hong
Kong
33 Essaid et al. (2010) personality types Morocco
34 Hamzah et al. (2010) personality types Malaysia
35 Hingorani (2008) personality types US
36 Hupfer et al. (2007) personality types not specified
37 Silverman et al. (2006) personality types not specified
38 Choe et al. (2004) personality types Korea
39 Amiel et al. (2004) personality types USA
40 Moss et al. (2006) gender UK
41 n.a. (2009) gender Canada, US, India, Germany,
Japan, Mexico, Chile & China
42 Moss et al. (2007) gender UK
43 Li et al. (2007) gender Britain & China
44 Horvath et al. (2006) gender UK
45 Herring et al. (2002) gender not specified

4. 4
46 Zhe Xu et al. (2006) gender UK
47 Hupfer et al. (2007) gender not specified
48 Webster et al. (2000) cognitive styles Australia
49 Faiola et al. (2006) cognitive styles US
50 Chen et al. (2004) cognitive styles UK
51 Kim et al. (2002) cognitive styles Columbia
52 Braun et al. (2009) cognitive styles UK
53 Benyon (2006) cognitive styles UK
54 Wang et al. (2004) learning styles Taiwan
55 Silva et al. (2009) learning styles not specified
56 Savitch et al. (2004) disability not specified
57 Namatame (2006) disability Japan
58 Liu et al. (2004) disability US
59 Yu et al. (2002) disability not specified
60 Sun (2009) disability China
61 Charalampidou (2007) language not specified
62 Nuopponen (2011) language not specified
63 Ogden et al. (2000) language not specified
64 Arnold (1998) language US
65 Makki et al. (2006) language not specified
66 Doring (2009) others not specified
67 Lo et al. (2007) others US
68 Mestre (2011) others US
69 Nakic et al. (2009) others Croatia
70 Shafie et al. (2010) others Malaysia
71 Van Deursen (2009) others Netherlands
72 Li et al. (2007) others Britain & China
73 Sun (2009) others China
Few articles investigate more than a dimension of diversity which makes the total is 73,
which is more than total number of examined articles i.e.70 articles.
Figure 1 Number of articles selected for further review according to dimensions of
diversity.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18

5. 5
Figure 1 is the representation of diversity dimensions including age, culture, personality types
and preferences, gender, cognitive styles, disability and locality of articles selected. In brief,
websites development and design related to age of websites users are mostly investigate
followed by culture of the users.
Figure 2 Number of articles selected according to year of publications.
Figure 2 shows grouping of articles according to year of publication. From the year 1997 to
1999, only one article related to the topic published; in year 2000 - 2002, 10 articles
published; 2003 - 2005, 18 articles; 25 articles in 2006 – 2008, 15 articles in 2009 - 2011 and
one article with no year of publication.
Figure 3 Number of articles selected according to databases i.e. Google Scholars, Citeseerx,
IEEE and Science Direct.
In Figure 3, selected articles were grouped based on databases selected to discover for the
articles. Total of 38 articles related to topic available in Google Scholars, 15 articles in
Citeseerx, 12 articles in IEEE while 5 articles in Science Direct.

6. 6
1.3 Conceptual Framework of the Review
Figure 1 shows that there are seven dimensions of human diversity related to websites
development and design articles that are widely investigated. Those dimensions such as age,
culture, personality types/ preferences, gender, cognitive/learning styles, disability and will
be discussed further in the findings and discussion parts. “Others”[66][67][68][69][70][71]
in the
chart refers to diversity dimensions such as religion, race, sexual orientation, skills, ability
and nationality. Due to manageability factor, all those less investigated dimensions were
grouped together.
2.0 Methodology
This study employed documentary analysis which is the review on 70 articles from
different types of publication i.e. proceedings in international conference, journals, research
reports and dissertations of universities, from the year of 1997 to 2011. A thorough search
has been conducted in four databases namely Google Scholars, Citeseerx, IEEE and Science
Direct to search for articles relevant to the topic of study. The data representation below
shows types of publication and number of articles for each type.
Figure 4
Number of articles selected for further review according to type of publications i.e. journals,
proceedings and research papers.
3.0 Findings
From the literatures, it was found that the researchers either proposed guidelines for
web localization or assistive technologies such as web interfaces, adaptive system or web
devices to accommodate with differences of website users. They proposed the guidelines
either by conducting reviews on previous studies or by using participatory approach i.e.
involving the group of people in research during the design, development and the evaluation
processes[9]
whereas the assistive technologies were proposed by applying well known
theories or well established guidelines.

7. 7
3.1 Age and Web-based Technology
Figure 5
Number of guidelines and assistive technologies recommended by the researches to
accommodate with different ages of websites users.
.
Figure 5 shows that most of the literatures established sets of
guidelines[10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23]
while few of them developed assistive
technologies[15][24][25]
for serving multi ages of websites users. Below are reference name for
the guidelines which were proposed by the researches: Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
Guidelines[11]
, web usability guidelines[13]
, web accessibility guidelines[23]
, SilverWeb
guidelines and participatory[22]
and senior friendly guidelines by National Institute of
Aging[20]
. Some literatures recommended guidelines but no specific reference name given to
them[10][12][14][16][17][18][19][25][26]
. Few assistive technologies introduced to accommodate age
differences such as collaborative learning[15]
, expert system technology[24]
and user sensitive
inclusive design[21]
. Many of the literatures not applied specific theory for meeting the
demands of different ages of users. Most of them employed participatory approach to identify
what the users expect and embed them in their websites. One study reported to employ
Theory of User Sensitive Inclusive Design (USID) by Gregor, Newell and Zajicek been
applied which looked at universal usability from a different angle[21]
. Gregor et al. taking into
account more of the specific demographic, learning and behavioral characteristics of the older
adult audience.
3.2 Culture and Web-based Technology
One of the culture models widely used by the researchers and web designers is
Hofstede‟s Dimensions of Culture Theory. Hofstede established five dimensions of culture
including power distance, individuality, uncertainty avoidance, gender role differences and
time orientation[27]
. Model of User Interfaces developed guidelines for interface designs by
using theory from Hofstede as the main reference[28]
. The components are metaphors, mental
model, navigation, interaction and presentation. From the literature review, it was found that
culture dimension of human diversity is the most investigated. Most of the researchers
proposed assistive technologies that are website interfaces[5][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35]
and
web devices[36][37]
for accommodating with the differences and some came out with set of
guidelines[6][8][38]
. Proposed cultural localization of web content[29][30][36]
, cross cultural model
based on Hofstede‟s cross cultural theory[5][27][28][31][33][35]
, investigative strategical model[32]
and with culture centered design[34]
. Most of the literatures applied Theory of Localization
conceptualized by Anthony Pym in 2006 which claimed that the process during which a

8. 8
general (internationalized) product is adapted to the needs of a locale, which is associated
with a specific culture and specific linguistics characteristics.
Figure 6
Number of guidelines and assistive technologies recommended by researches to
accommodate with culture differences among websites users.
3.3 Personality types/ preferences
Figure 7 shows that none of the literatures proposing guidelines for developing and
designing websites to better facilitate different personality types. All of them reported to
working with website interfaces and adaptive systems to reach the internet users worldwide.
For accommodating with human psychology aspect particularly personality types, researches
in this field proposed assistive technology i.e. adaptive system[39][40][41][42][43]
or
interfaces[44][45]
to accommodate the differences. The systems were proposed after a deep
analysis on theories and the most applied theory is Carl Jung‟s Theory of Personality Types.
The four Jungian psychological types are extraversion vs. introversion, sensing vs. intuition,
thinking vs. feeling; and judging vs. perceiving[40]
. Another model of personality types used
is Eyseneck‟s Model of Personality Types[46]
. Eyseneck identified three personality types
labeled neuroticism vs. stability, extraversion vs. introversion and psychoticism vs. impulse
control. Besides that, researchers within this field proposed Web-based Adaptive Feedback to
adapt with differential in human personality types[39]
, Personalized Education[40]
, System
LearnFit Framework, adaptive media[42]
, web based decision support[43]
, diverse user
interfaces[44]
and site personalization[45]
and Hamzah not mentioned their system clearly[41]
.
Figure 7
Number of assistive technologies recommended by researches to accommodate with different
personality types/ preferences of websites users.

9. 9
3.4 Gender
Figure 8
Number of guidelines and assistive technologies recommended by researches to
accommodate with gender differences among websites users.
Figure 8 shows that the a number of literatures established set of guidelines for website
development and design[1][45][46][47][48][49][50]
or web interfaces[51][52]
to accommodate with
gender differences in navigating websites. In brief, studies proposed gender localization
websites[45][47][50]
to address gender differences, multimodal interfaces[51]
or interface design
guidelines[52]
. One study recommended Mirroring principles[1]
which suggest that efficacy of
tools or messages can be maximized by ensuring that they contain features that mirror the
preferences of the target market. It was found that most of the guidelines and interfaces were
proposed by conducting participatory study or from reviewing the literatures. When gender
localization websites are concerned, most of the literatures applied Theory of Selectivity
Hypothesis by Meyers and Levy in 1989 which claimed that men are selective processors
who rely on highly available and salient cues whereas women are comprehensive processors
who are apt to assimilate all available information before arriving at a conclusion. Some
applied Einstein and Hunt‟s Item-specific versus Relational Processing which stated that
attributes that are unique or distinctive to a message are important and there is a tendency to
focus on a few salient attributes (more male oriented). When relational processing occurs
(more female oriented), similarities, shared themes, or interrelationships among disparate
pieces of information are sought.
3.5 Cognitive /Learning Styles
Cognitive styles differ from learning styles. Cognitive style is a description of a
consumers‟ preferred way of processing information[53]
whereas learning styles refer to
different approaches learners would take to learn[54]
. Both are grouped together as they share
common characteristic particularly human cognitive processing. Figure 9 shows that the
literatures proposed guidelines[3][53][55]
and assistive technology such as websites
interfaces[56]
, adaptive systems[54][57][58]
and web devices[59]
to facilitate human differences in
cognitive and learning styles. Few articles proposed principles such as Urban Design
principles[3]
, Cultural Cognition Theory[55]
and the Bayesian method[53]
while few other
suggested websites interfaces with the name of Adaptive Intelligent Interfaces[56]
, intelligent
directory[57]
, web-based application Management of Learning Styles[58]
and styles matching
strategy named as Coordinate Tutor (CooTutor)[54]
, user oriented web devices by using IR
research approach[59]
. applied definitions and approach[56]
to cognitive styles developed by
Richard Riding in 1991. Two principle of cognitive styles dimensions were identified that
are verbal- imagery – an individual‟s position on this dimension determines whether that
person tends to use images or verbal representation to represent information when thinking.

10. 10
Wholist-analytic – an individual‟s position on this dimension determines whether that
person processes information in parts or as a whole. proposed “cultural cognition theory”[55]
based on theory by Nisbett suggested that a novel approach in computer mediated
communication (CMC) research: observing the performance effects of web sites that are
influenced at the design level by different cultural cognitive styles. applied concept of Field
Dependent (FD) vs. Field Independent (FI)[57][59]
, one of the dimensions of cognitive styles
by Witkin and Asch in 1948. FD describes the degree to which a user‟s perception or
comprehension of information is affected by the surrounding perceptual or contextual field
that is “the extent to which the organization of the prevailing field dominates perception of
any of its parts”. Benyon[3]
applied Gordon Cullen‟s theory on „Serial Vision‟, the Webspace
can be split into two elements: the existing view (i.e. the view of the current locations or
page) and the emerging view (i.e. the view locations or pages directly accessible from the
current one). Wang[54]
and Silva[58]
and employed the Felder-Silverman Model which
categorizes learning styles into four scales that are active/reflective, sensorial/intuitive,
visual/verbal and sequential/verbal.
Figure 9
Number of guidelines and assistive technologies recommended by researches to
accommodate with gender differences among websites users.
0
2
4
6
Guidelines Assistive Technologies
3.6 Disability
Figure 10
Number of guidelines and assistive technologies recommended by researches to
accommodate with websites users having different disabilities.
Figure 10 shows that the previous researchers either proposed guidelines[23]
or
assistive technologies such as web interfaces[9]
or web devices[60][61][62]
for accommodating

11. 11
with disabilities of websites users. Sun introduces design model and method to improve the
levels of educational web accessibility based on universal design principles[23]
. The universal
design principles that have been employed in the study are as the following: equitable use,
flexibility in use, simple and intuitive, perceptible information, tolerance for error, low
physical effort and size and space for approach and use[23]
. Savitch, Freeman, Clare and
Zaphiris developed interfaces for dementia people who have problems with language,
memory and visuospatial processing[9]
and managed to introduce an interface by employing
person centered approach which included them in the research. Namatame, Nishioka and
Kitajima[60]
proposed web based interactive materials for assisting hard of hearing people by
redesigning the web page based on their characteristics and the feedback from evaluation
session indicated that the redesigned was successful. Liu, Ma, Schalow and Spruill[61]
developed Natural Voices text to speech (TTS), an assistive device, for visually impaired
individuals. The device converts machine readable text into a spoken audio stream that
closely resembles human speech. Yu, Reid and Brewster[62]
introduced multimodal data
visualization system to assist the visually impaired and blind people. The system is to address
problems in assessing graphical information on the Internet, and the information in the graphs
is conveyed to through haptic and audio channels[62]
. Sun[23]
applied universal design
principles to advance the accessibility level of websites. The term „universal design‟ means a
concept or philosophy for designing and delivering products and services that are usable by
people with the widest possible range of functional capabilities, which include products and
services that are directly usable (without requiring assistive technologies) and products and
services that are made usable with assistive technologies.
3.7 Language
Figure 11
Number of assistive technologies recommended by researches to accommodate with different
languages by websites users.
Figure 11 shows that the previous researchers proposed assistive technologies
particularly adaptive systems[63][64]
and web devices[4][36][65]
to accommodate with language
differences among the users. They either proposed multilingual websites[63]
with Keizei
system[64]
or came out with web localization[4][36][65]
as the solution for language differences
i.e. taking a product and making it linguistically and culturally appropriate to the target locale
(country/region and language) where it will be used and sold[65]
. None of them reported to
establish set of guidelines for guiding in web development and design to deal with languages
issues. It also found that there is no specific language theory served as a basis in conducting
researches on web development and design related to language differences.

12. 12
4.0 Discussion
Increment in internet usage over the years makes it the easiest and fastest medium for
disseminating information. However, due to the differences in terms of demographic,
cognitive, psychological factors etc. among individuals, it is almost impossible for a website
without any localization to disseminate information to its target group. Findings indicate that
previous researches proposed various solutions which can be categorized into guidelines and
assistive technologies i.e. web interfaces, adaptive system and web devices, for matching the
website development and designs with end users preferences. The developer and designer
sometimes developed and evaluated the proposed method to make sure the effectiveness so
that the website delivered what and to whom it supposes to.
Following is the number of guidelines and assistive technologies proposed, where
articles selected for this study are concerned:
Table 2
Number of guidelines and assistive technologies proposed
Dimensions Guidelines Assistive Technologies
Age 15 3
Culture 3 12
Personality
types/preferences
- 7
Gender 5 2
Cognitive/learning styles 3 5
Disability 1 4
Language - 5
The findings can be used by future web developers and designers for creating
websites that matches the end user. For example, for old people websites, they can refer to
guidelines proposed whereas for creating students websites with multiple learning and
cognitive styles, they can refer to guidelines and assistive technologies proposed.
For a profit organization, matching websites to users‟ can lead to increment in sales
while for a non profit organization; it may achieve the objectives of the development.
5.0 Contributions, Recommendations and Conclusion.
This study is as a quick and solid reference for researches who wish to conduct study
on web development and design related to human diversity issues. In order to identify the
gaps from the previous research, cross check between dimensions of diversity as defined by
Ingram[7]
, Hartnett[6]
and Goold[8]
with articles on web development related to human
diversity was conducted. It shows that dimensions of human diversity that have not been
covered yet are as the following: education background, socio economic status,
parental/marital status, work experience or professional background and occupation. Other
vital dimensions but are less investigated such as religious belief, race and ethnicity.
However, it should be noted that this study only involving literatures from four databases
which are Google Scholars, Citeseerx, IEEE and Science Direct from the year of 1997 to
2011. Further research can be conducted to bridge the gaps of the previous literatures. It is
clear that various researches have been done to find ways or method to accommodate human
differences. Some of the researches were funded by companies only to seek input from the
target market. This is so because websites that compatible with the target market will attract

13. 13
them more and have potential to increase sales. Literatures show that there is no single
appropriate method to facilitate all layers of human. The websites should be developed and
designed in the ways that accommodate the differences or in other words as web localization
i.e. customize the architecture of the website that suits target users.
References
1. Moss, G., Gunn, R. & Kubacki, K. (2006). Gender and Web Design: The Implications of the
Mirroring Principle for the Services Branding Model. Retrieved from
http://www.acrwebsite.org/volumes/gmcb_v08/CP%20paper%2030%20Gloria%20Moss.pdf
2. Garrigoz, I. & Gomez, J. (2006). Modelling user behaviour aware websites with PRML. Retrieved
from d.o.i 10.1.1.95.9260
3. Benyon, D. (2006). Navigating information space: web site design and lessons from the built
environment. PsychNology Journal, 4(1), 7-24. Retrieved from
http://www.psychnology.org/File/PNJ4%281%29/PSYCHNOLOGY_JOURNAL_4_1_BENYON.pdf
4. Arnold, M. D. (1998). Building a Truly World Wide Web: AReview of the Essentials of International
Communication. Retrieved from
5. Stengers, H., De Troyer, O., Baetens, M., Boers, F. & Abdalghani, N. M. (2003). Localization of web
sites: is there still a need for it?. Retrieved from http://www.sigweb.org/ht04/HT04/web-
content/workshops/WebEngineering/HT04WE_Stengers.pdf
6. Hartnett, M., Madhumita, B. & Dron, J. (2007). Diversity in online learners: searching for differences
that may matter. Seventh IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT
2007). Retrieved from
7. Ingram, P. D. (2001). An overview of diversity awareness. Retrieved from
http://pubs.cas.psu.edu/freepubs/pdfs/ui362.pdf
8. Goold, A., Craig, A. & Coldwell, J. (2007). Accommodating culture and cultural diversity in online
teaching. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 23(4), 490-507. Retrieved from
http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet23/goold.html
9. Savitch, N., Freeman, E., Clare, L., & Zaphiris, P. (2004). Learning from people with Dementia to
improve accessibility of website interfaces. Retrieved from d.o.i 10.1.1.140.3759.pdf
10. Zaphiris, P. & Savitch, N. (2008). Age-related differences in browsing the web. Retrieved from d.o.i
10.1.1.167.7963
11. Arch, A. (2009). Web accessibility for older users - successes and opportunities. 18th
International
Conference on World Wide Web.
12. Arnott, J.L., Khairulla, Z., Dickinson, A., Syme, A., Alm, N., Eisma, R., & Gregor, P. (2004). E-mail
interfaces for older people. IEEE International Conference on Systems, man and Cybernatics 2004.
Retrieved from http://www.computing.dundee.ac.uk/staff/jarnott/SMC2004-Email.pdf
13. Becker, S. A. (2004). A study of web usability for older adults seeking online health resources. ACM
transactions on Computer Human Interaction, 11(4), 387-406. Retrieved from
http://www.uam.es/personal_pdi/psicologia/pei/download/amiel2004.pdf
14. Capozzo, D., Groezinger, R. L., Ng, K. F. & Siegel, M. J. (2008). Appeal of web page layout and
characteristics based on age: usability research through eye tracking at Fidelity Investments Inc.
15. Chadwick-Dias, A., Tedesco, D. & Tullis, T. (2004). Older adults and web usability: is web
experience the same as web expertise?. International Conference on Human Computer Interaction
2004. doi 10.1.1.88.1796
16. Borse, J., Robles, E. & Schwartz, N. (2005). Designing for kids in the digital age: summary of
research and recommendations for designers. Retrieved from
http://www.rockman.com/publications/presentations/Designing_for_Kids.pdf
17. Djamasbi, S., Tullis, T., Siegel, M., Capozzo, D., Groezinger, R. & Ng, F. (2008). Generation Y &
web design: usability through eye tracking. Proceedings of the Americas Conference on Information
Systems2008. Retrieved from http://users.wpi.edu/~djamasbi/2008-Djamasbi%20et%20al-AMCIS.pdf

14. 14
18. Fukuda, R. & Bubb, H. (2003). Eye tracking study on web-use: comparison between younger and
elderly users in case of search task with electronic timetable service. PsychNology Journal, 1(3), 202-
228. Retrieved from doi 10.1.1.80.5250
19. Hanson, V. L. (2009). Age and web access: the next generation. 18th
International Conference on
World Wide Web 2009. Retrieved from
20. Hart, T. A. (2004). Evaluation of websites for older adults: how “senior-friendly” are they?.
Retrieved from http://psychology.wichita.edu/surl/usabilitynews/61/older_adults.htm
21. Redish, J. & Chisnell, D. (2004). Designing websites for older adult: a review of recent research.
Retrieved from http://assets.aarp.org/www.aarp.org_/articles/research/oww/AARP-
LitReview2004.pdf
22. Zaphiris, P., Sustar, H. & Pfeil, U. (2008). Inclusive design for older people. Retrieved from
http://www-edc.eng.cam.ac.uk/~jag76/hci_workshop08/zaphiris.pdf
23. Sun, Z. (2009). On accessibility of concept, principle and model of educational web sites design.
International Conference on New Trends in Information and Service Science. Retrieved from
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5260918
24. Fernando, S., Money, A., Elliman & Lines, L. (2008). Age related cognitive impairments and assistive
web-base technology. European and Mediterranean Conference on Information Systems 2008.
Retrieved from
http://www.iseing.org/emcis/EMCIS2008/Proceedings/Refereed%20Papers/Contributions/C%2068/A
ge%20Related4.pdf
25. Large, A., Beheshti, J. & Rahman, T. (2002). Design criteria for children‟s web portals: the users
speak out. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53(2), 79-94. doi
10.1.1.115.6403
26. Chadwick-Dias, A., McNulty, M. & Tullis, T. (2003). Web usability and age: how design changes can
improve performance. International Conference on CUU 2003. Retrieved from
http://www.wpi.edu/Pubs/E-project/Available/E-project-042208-
111154/unrestricted/Fidelity_MQP_2008.pdf
27. Marcus, A. & Hamoodi, S. (2009). Culture's impact on Arabic website design. Retrieved from
http://www.amanda.com/joomla_uploads/whitepapers/AM+A_XCultArabic_19May09.pdf
28. Marcus, A. & Gould, E. W. (2000). Crosscurrents: cultural dimensions and global web user-interface
design, interactions. Retrieved from http://aaa.volospin.com/BT606B/Culture_dimension_p32-
marcus.pdf
29. Cyr, D & Trevor-Smith, H. (2004). Localization of web design: An empirical comparison of German,
Japanese, and U.S. website characteristics. Journal of the American Society for Information Science
Technology, 55(13), 1-10. doi 10.1.1.85.8765
30. Dirscherl, K., Audebert, F. & Husmann, Y. (2001). Localization of web user interfaces. Cross-
cultural differences in home page design. Retrieved from
http://www.icunet.ag/uploads/media/Localization_of_Web_User_Interfaces.pdf
31. Duygu, S. & Eristi, B. (2009). Cultural factors in web design. Journal of Theoretical and Applied
Information Technology, 117-132. Retrieved from http://www.jatit.org/volumes/research-
papers/Vol9No2/5Vol9No2.pdf
32. Jagne, J., Smith, S. G. Duncker, E. & Curzon, P. (n.d.). Cross-cultural interface design strategy.
Retrieved from http://www.eis.mdx.ac.uk/research/idc/papers/IDC-TR-2004-006.pdf
33. Khashman, N & Large, A. (2010). Investigating the design of Arabic web interfaces using Hofstede’s
cultural dimensions: a case study of government web portals. Retrieved from http://www.cais-
acsi.ca/proceedings/2010/CAIS063_KhashmanLarge_Final.pdf
34. Li, H., Sun, X. & Zhang, K. (2007). Culture-centered design: cultural factors in interface usability and
usability tests. Eighth ACIS International Conference on Software on Software Engineering, Artificial
Intelligence, Networking, and Parallel/Distributed Computing, 1084-1088. Retrieved from
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=04288011
35. Smith, Michael J., Salvendy & Gavriel. (2001). Cross-cultural user-interface design. Proceedings of
the Human Computer Interface International Conference, 502-502. Retrieved from
http://www.amanda.com/cms/uploads/media/CrossCulturalUserInterfaceDesign_HCII01_Marcus_16
Apr01.pdf

15. 15
36. Makki, K. S. & Leppert, G. (2006). Factors of usability design for multilingual and multicultural
websites. doi 10.1.1.1.3132
37. Zhao, W., Massey, B. L., Murphy, J. & Fang, L. (2003). Cultural Dimensions of Website Design and
Content. Journal of Prometheus, 21(1). Retrieved from
http://web.biz.uwa.edu.au/staff/jmurphy/Cultural_Dimensions.pdf
38. Wan Abdul Rahim, W. M. I., Nor Laila, M. N. & Shafie, M. (2007). Incorporating the cultural
dimensions into the theoretical framework of website information architecture. 12th
International
Conference on Human Computer Interaction 2007. Retrieved from
http://rahim.uitm.edu.my/publications/Wan_HCII07.pdf
39. Choe, H., Bae, Y., Kim, T & Lee, T. (2004). Work in progress - the study of web-based adaptive
feedback based on the analysis of individual differences. 34th
ASEE/ IEEE Conference in Education
2004. Retrieved from http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=1408491
40. Essaid, E. B., El Hassan, A. & Mohamed, E. A. (2010). Design of an adaptive e-learning model based
on learner's personality. Retrieved from http://www.ubicc.org/files/pdf/504_504.pdf
41. Hamzah, M.I. Embi, M.A., Ismail, A. (2010). ICT and diversity in learners‟ attitude on Smart School
initiative. Procedia Social and Behavioural Sciences, 7 (2010), 728-737. Retrieved from
42. Hingorani, K. (2008). Social presence, personality types, and IT-supported teaching methods.
Retrieved from http://www.iacis.org/iis/2008_iis/pdf/S2008_901.pdf
43. Silverman, B. G., Bharathy, G., Pourdehnad, J., Green, M., Lowe, D., Riley, D. & Salisbury, J. (2006).
Individual consumer differences and design implications for web-based decision support. Retrieved
from http://www.seas.upenn.edu/~barryg/PersonalityConsumers.pdf
44. Cyr, D., Ilsever, J., Bonanni, C. & Bowes, J. (2004). Website design and culture: An empirical
investigation. doi 10.1.1.86.3786
45. Hupfer, M. & Detlor, B. (2007). Sex, gender and self-concept: predicting web shopping site design
preferences. Eighth World Congress on the Management of eBusiness 2007. Retrieved from
http://www.business.mcmaster.ca/IS/detlorb/IJEB%207%283%29.pdf
46. Amiel, T. & Sargen, S. L. (2004). Individual differences in Internet usage motives. The Journal of
Computers in Human Behavior, 20, 711-726. Retrieved from
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0747563204001220
47. Horvath, G., Moss, G., Gunn, R. & Vass, E. (2006). Gender and web design software. Retrieved from
http://www.iiisci.org/journal/CV$/sci/pdfs/I572DJB.pdf
48. Li, N. & Kirkup, G. (2007). Gender and cultural differences in Internet use: A study of China and the
UK. Journal of Computers and Education, 48 (2007), 301-317. Retrieved from
http://ctl.scu.edu.tw/scutwebpub/website/DocUpload/CourseTeaching/cyc20078393742_2.pdf
49. n. a. (2009). Gender and website design across cultures. Retrieved from
http://csrc.lse.ac.uk/asp/aspecis/20090024.pdf
50. Moss, G & Gunn, R. (2007). Gender differences in website design: implications for education.
Retrieved from http://www.iiisci.org/journal/CV$/sci/pdfs/I196XFB.pdf
51. Herring, S. & Martinson, A. (2002). Designing for community: the effects of gender representation in
videos on a web site. Proceedings of the 35th
Hawaii International conference on System Sciences
2002. Retrieved from doi 10.1.1.104.9320
52. Zhe Xu, John, D., Boucouvalas, A. C. (2006). Social factors and interface design guidelines.
Retrieved from http://www.igi-global.com/viewtitlesample.aspx?id=13169
53. Braun, M., Lee, C., Urban, G., & Hauser, J. R. (2009). Does matching website characteristics to
cognitive styles increase online sales?. Retrieved from http://www.mit.edu/~hauser/Papers/Braun-
Lee-Urban-Hauser%20Web%20Style%20Match%2012-03-09.pdf
54. Wang, H. C., Li, T. Y. & Chang, C. Y. (2004). A web-based tutoring system with styles-matching
strategy for learning spatial geometry. Journal of Interacting with Computers, 225(1). Retrieved from
d.o.i 10.1.1.95.7123
55. Faiola, A. & Matei, S. A. (2006). Cultural cognitive style and web design: beyond a behavioural
inquiry into computer-mediated communication. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11
(2006), 375-394. Retrieved from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol11/issue1/faiola.html
56. Webster, R. (2000). Cognitive styles and software agents for student information management of web-
based resources. Retrieved from d.o.i 10.1.1.89.9203

16. 16
57. Chen, S. Y., Magoulas, G. D. & Dimakopoulos, D. (2004). A flexible interface design for web
directories to accommodate different cognitive styles. Journal of the American Society for
Information Science and Technology, 56(1), 70-83. doi 10.1.1.64.5861
58. Silva, R. & Andrade, A. (2009). Development of a web application for management of learning styles.
Journal of Universal Computer Science, 15(7). Retrieved from
http://www.jucs.org/jucs_15_7/development_of_a_web
59. Kim, K. S. & Allen, B. (2002). Cognitive and task influences on web searching behaviour. Journal of
the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53(2), 109-119. Retrieved from
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/asi.10014/pdf
60. Namatame, M., Nishioka, T. & Kitajima, M. (2006). Designing a web page considering the
interaction characteristics of the hard of hearing. International Conference on CHP 2006, LNCS 4061,
136-143. Retrieved from
http://staff.aist.go.jp/kitajima.muneo/English/PAPERS%28E%29/ICCHP2006.html
61. Liu, S., Ma, W., Schalow, D., & Spruill, K. (2004). Improving web access for visually impaired users.
Retrieved from http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=1324570&userType=inst
62. Yu, W., Reid, D. & Brewster, S. (2002). Web-based multimodal graphs for visually impaired people.
Retrieved from d.o.i 10.1.1.100.1906
63. Nuopponen, A. (2011). Language policies of the intercultural business communication on the WWW.
Retrieved from http://lipas.uwasa.fi/comm/publications/interkult/extdoc/10nuoppon.pdf
64. Ogden, W. C. & Davis, M. W. (2000). Improving cross-language text retrieval with human
interactions. Proceedings of the 33rd
Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences 2000.
Retrieved from d.o.i. 10.1.1.121.8039.pdf
65. Charalampidou, P. (2007). Web localization. Retrieved from
http://www.kuleuven.be/cetra/papers/Papers2006/CHARALAMPIDOU.pdf
66. Lo, B. W. N & Cruz, A. M. S. (2007). Diversity and homogeneity in the cyberspace: a study of
website content preferences of selected Ethno-Linguistic groups. Retrieved from
http://www.iacis.org/iis/2007_iis/PDFs/Lo_Cruz.pdf
67. Döring, N. M. (2009). The Internet‟s impact on sexuality: A critical review of 15 years of research.
The Journal of Computers in Human Behaviour, 25, 1089-1101. Retrieved from
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0747563209000442
68. Van Deursen, A. J. A. M & Van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2009). Using the Internet: skill related problems in
users‟ online behaviour. Journal of Interacting with Computers, 21, 393-402. Retrieved from
http://www.utwente.nl/gw/mco/bestanden/Using%20the%20Internet-
%20Skill%20related%20problems.pdf
69. Shafie, M., Nor Laila, M. N., Wan Abdul Rahim, W. M. I. & Mohd Shukri, H. (2010). Muslim user
interface evaluation framework (Muslim-UI) for Islamic genre website:
a quantitative approach. Proceedings of the Third International Conference in ICT for Muslim 2010.
70. Mestre, L. S. (2011).Visibility of diversity within Association of Research Libraries websites. The
Journal of Academic Librarianship, 37(2), 101-108. Retrieved from
71. Nakic, J. & Granic, A. (2009). Adapting to student‟s individual differences: a step to better learning
performance. Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Technology Interfaces
2009. Retrieved from http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=05196122