Successfully reported this slideshow.

A Usable User Interface for Accessible Web Automation

1

Share

Loading in …3
×
1 of 15
1 of 15

A Usable User Interface for Accessible Web Automation

1

Share

Web automation has the potential to bridge the accessibility divide between the ways blind and sighted people access the Web; it can enable blind people to accomplish web browsing tasks that were previously slow, hard, or even impossible to achieve. In this paper, we propose and evaluate an intuitive and accessible web automation interface.

Web automation has the potential to bridge the accessibility divide between the ways blind and sighted people access the Web; it can enable blind people to accomplish web browsing tasks that were previously slow, hard, or even impossible to achieve. In this paper, we propose and evaluate an intuitive and accessible web automation interface.

More Related Content

Related Books

Free with a 14 day trial from Scribd

See all

A Usable User Interface for Accessible Web Automation

  1. 1. A Usable User Interface for Accessible Web Automation Yury Puzis Yevgen Borodin Faisal Ahmed I.V. Ramakrishnan Stony Brook University Stony Brook, USA 2012
  2. 2. Introduction • Non-visual browsing is hard • Not enough and too much information • Not enough and too much control • Browsing can be made easier • We will try • Interface > algorithms • Our contribution • Accessible and usable web automation interface 2 • Validation of the interface with a user study
  3. 3. Making a Purchase on Amazon.com Minimum of 6 – 8 steps just to complete a transaction Amazon is one of the most usable and one of the most popular shopping websites with visually impaired 3 Can this be automated?
  4. 4. Web Automation for Sighted People • Approaches: • Handcrafting scripts • Programming-by-example • Tools: • Form-filling in browsers • CoScripter • CoCo • Creo • Robofox • SmartBookmarks • … • Not designed for blind people 6
  5. 5. Web Automation for Blind People • Screen-readers • Handcrafting: impractically hard • Hearsay • Scientific prototype • programming-by-example (record / replay) • Trailblazer • Adaptation of CoScripter to JAWS • No deep integration with JAWS user interface 7
  6. 6. Usable and Accessible Web Automation Interface Very few actions are applicable in a given browsing state / context, and even fewer can lead to a meaningful and desirable result. A very simple automation interface 8
  7. 7. Usable and Accessible Web Automation Interface A very simple automation interface: 1. Ask for a suggestion of a single action 2. Confirm execution, skip, or ignore … and continue browsing … Atari’s Star Trek video game instructions: 1. Insert coins 2. Avoid Klingons 9
  8. 8. Advantages • Focus on what’s important • No information overload • No need to manage macros • Automation without taking away control • The user knows what’s going on at all times • The user can deviate away from the scenario • The user can steer into a scenario 10
  9. 9. User Study • 17 participants • Comfortable / very comfortable with computers • JAWS is the primary screen-reader • 2 scenarios • Buying a book (audiobooks.com) • Reserving a hotel room (hilton.com) • 3 trials for each scenario • 2 without automation, 1 with • No computational model • Model’s deficiencies may affect the UI evaluation 11
  10. 10. Task Completion Time 600 Manual (trial 1) Manual (trial 2) 500 Average time (seconds) Automated Assistant 400 300 200 100 0 Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Average completion time 12 (1) buying a book (2) reserving a hotel room
  11. 11. Perceived Task Difficulty 5.00 Manual (trial 1) 4.50 (1=very easy, 5=very hard) Manual (trial 2) 4.00 Automated Assistant Average Difficulty 3.50 3.00 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Average difficulty 13 (1) buying a book (2) reserving a hotel room
  12. 12. Questionnaire I wish I could do online transactions faster than I can 3.88 (1.11) with a regular screen reader I often experience difficulties while doing online 2.62 (1.02) transactions with a screen reader Doing the same online transaction for the second time 4.59 (0.71) was easier than the first time Doing a transaction with the Automated Assistant was 4.12 (1.27) the easiest I want to use Automated Assistant in the future 4.29 (1.10) 14 Average 5-Point Likert scale values (St. Dev.) Scale 1=Strongly Disagree to 5=Strongly Agree
  13. 13. Conclusion • Web automation can help make the web more accessible • Automation is good in moderation • Encouraging user study results Testimonials • “Assistant mode is really, really good” • “Automated Assistant makes the site easier to use” • “Looks like Automated Assistant can save a lot of 15 time, especially if it works with AJAX”
  14. 14. What Is Missing? • Computational model • Submitted to UIST 2012 • Deployment! • Crowd sourcing / Social Accessibility • User feedback on a large scale 16
  15. 15. Thank You! 17 This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation - Awards: IIS-0808678 and CNS-0751083

Editor's Notes

  • Speak fasterDon’t say “you can see” too much
  • Both interface and algorithms that support it are important, but priorities make a huge difference.
  • And blind users don’t shop – shopping is too hard
  • A few words about existing web automation solutions
  • assuming that there is a model thatcan make this possibleThe model will need toRecord all actionsRefresh the suggestions at every change of state
  • We are focusing on the information and actions that (we think) is / are important for doing things that are usually done on this website.We are removing the need to manage sequences of actions, and sets of sequences of actionsWe do not leave the screen-reader interface and keep control in user’s handsThe user can always deviate from what s/he is doing, into / from a scenario, and the system should pick up from there
  • Not using a computational model because we do not want the deficiencies of a computational model to affect the results.
  • Limited at 10 min. A few FAILSThe users were reasonably proficient
  • Add numbersMore results
  • ×