The document discusses a survey conducted to understand perceptions of web accessibility. The survey found that definitions from standards/regulatory bodies were most accepted. Participants were motivated by social reasons like inclusion and ethics rather than legal compliance. More research is needed to show how accessibility benefits all users, not just those with disabilities, as differing understandings can cause tension. An ideal definition would be realistic, concise, proactive, and applicable to various contexts and groups.

1. Understanding Web Accessibility and Its Drivers
Yeliz Yesilada, Giorgio Brajnik,
Markel Vigo and Simon Harper

2. How do YOU perceive web accessibility?
1. What is the main motivation for embracing
accessibility?
2. Is web accessibility specific to disabled people?
3. How can we demonstrate the other benefits of web
accessibility?
4. Can we consider "providing access" as the baseline for
web accessibility?
5. What needs to be done to turn web accessibility from
an afterthought to something that is done proactively?
2/23

3. Why does this matter?
• Guide and help in better teaching web accessibility;
• Better communicate the meaning of the concept;
• Advance web accessibility as a research field by providing
a shared understanding;
• Improve penetration of web accessibility into commercial
and industrial settings.
3/23

4. How did we investigate this?
4/23

5. What did we find?
• Definitions by standardisation/regulatory bodies have higher
acceptance.
• People are led by the social aspect of accessibility.
• Forcing people does not engage on accessibility.
• Empirical research is needed on demonstrating how
accessibility benefits all.
• Different understandings of web accessibility can generate
tension.
• A definition has to be realistic, concise, be proactive and refer to
different contexts and user groups.
5/23

6. The survey: Demographics (Part 1)
6/23

7. The survey: Questionnaire (Part 2)
D1 Web accessibility means that people with disabilities can use the Web. More
specifically, Web accessibility means that people with disabilities can
perceive, understand, navigate and interact with the Web, and that they can
contribute to the web [W3C WAI].
D2 Technology is accessible if it can be used as effectively by people with
disabilities as by those without [SECTION 508].
D3 The extent to which a product website can be used by specified users with
specified disabilities to achieve specified goals with effectiveness, efficiency
and satisfaction in a specified context of use [ISO].
D4 A website is accessible if it is effective, efficient and satisfactory for more
people in more situations [Thatcher et al, Constructing Accessible Websites].
D5 The removal of all technical barriers to effective interaction.
7/23

8. The survey: Questionnaire (Part 2)
8/23

9. The survey: Statements (Part 3)
9/23

10. Gender
Female
%40
Male
%60
10/23

11. Age
18-24 (%3)
55+ (%18)
25-32 (%32)
35-54 (%48)
11/23

12. Country
160
%49
140
120
%32
100
80
60
40
%8
%5 %6
20
0
USA Canada Europe Australia Others 12/23

13. Work
Others
Non-Governmental
Organisation (%11)
Industry (%40)
Governmental
Organisation (%13)
Academia (%33)
13/23

14. Education
140
120 %38
100
80
%21
60 %18
40
20 %5 %4
0
Computer Social Other Psychology Design
Science Sciences Science and
14/23
Engineering

15. Role
Others
Researchers
Policy Makers (%1) (%26)
Student (%3)
Practitioners
(%27)
Consultants
(%27)
Manager (%10)
15/23

16. Specialisation
100 %31
90
80 %23
70
60
50
40 %11
%9
30 %7
20 %4 %3
10
0
HCI UX
Web
Design Science
Software Business
Computer 16/23
Accessibility Engineering

17. Interest/Motivation
17/23

18. Interest/Motivation
• Specialisation
– “Designing better products” is the principle reason why engineers embrace
accessibility.
– Very few designers are forced to do web accessibility.
• Education
– Business people did not specify increasing revenue as their main
motivation.
• Role
– Majority of consultants, practitioners, managers, researchers agree on
social reasons (ethical and inclusion)
– Researchers are the least interested in ethical reasons.
• Work
– Complying with law is quite low in industry and governmental organisations.
18/23

19. Definitions Ranking (Total score)
1000
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
D1 D2 D3 D4 D5
19/23

20. Revisiting….What did we find?
• Definitions by standardisation/regulatory bodies have higher
acceptance.
• People are led by the social aspect of accessibility.
• Forcing people does not engage on accessibility.
• Empirical research is needed on demonstrating how
accessibility benefits all.
• Different understandings of web accessibility can generate
tension.
• A definition has to be realistic, concise, be proactive and refer to
different contexts and user groups.
20/23

21. Future Research
• Investigate statements and their relationships with
definitions and motivations.
– Relationship between accessibility and usability;
– Accessibility for all vs. for disabled people;
– Web accessibility vs. user experience;
– Inclusion vs exclusion, etc.
• How do people who are not in the field perceive web
accessibility?
21/23

22. Joint W4A-WWW2012 Panel on “Exploring
Perceptions of Accessibility”
• Wednesday, April 18th 2012 -- 16:00-17:30
• #w4apanel12 #w4a12
• Panelists:
– Ricardo Baeza-Yates (VP of Research for EMEA & LatAm Yahoo! Research);
– Chieko Asakawa (IBM Fellow, IBM Research, Tokyo);
– Ed Chi (Research Scientist, Google+, Google);
– Bebo White (Departmental Associate – Emeritus, SLAC National Accelerator
Laboratory);
– Mike Paciello (Founder & Principal, TPG); and
– Georges Gouriten (Télécom ParisTech).
22/23

23. Questions!
• Email: yyeliz@metu.edu.tr
• Home Page: www.metu.edu.tr/~yyeliz
23/23