creating usable websites for people with learning disabilities

Exploring methods to test usability of web interfaces for people with learning

disabilities

Peter WilliamsWith thanks to Andy Minnion and Ian Rowlands

Painless Introduction to DHUCL 2 March 2011

Plan of talk★Background, context, aims etc.

★Study Part One: Eliciting the (usability) issues

★ Methods; individual studies; findings

★Study Part Two: Comparing websites

★ Introducing ‘trade-off’ analysis

Background and context

“a state of arrested or incomplete development of mind”Intellectual impairmentSocial or adaptive dysfunctionEarly onset (WHO, 2006)

Classified into ‘Mild’, ‘Moderate’, ‘Profound (and multiple)’

Introduction: definition of LD

Background

‘The Road Ahead: Information for young people with learning difficulties, their families and supporters at transition’

Social Care Institute for Excellence (SCIE)

Problem statementLack of appropriate information (Tarleton, 2004)

Much is inaccessible (Tarleton, 2004)

Even ‘accessible’ information hard to access (Davis et al, 2001; Minnion et al, 2008)

ICT lauded as possible answer (Florian & Hegarty 2004)

But, little research on the most effective interfaces (Bohman, 2007)

Aims and scopeAim✦To determine which Web page interface factors facilitate success in information retrieval by people with LD

ScopeParticipantsTechnology/platform Focus (IR)

Stages/steps

Stages/stepsPART ONEExplore contextual factors Develop usability set-tasks Elicit the factors affecting information retrievalTest methods of capturing user preferences (I’ll tell you about that later!)

PART TWOConstruct various different ‘accessible’ websites Compare - performance and preferenceDetermine the optimum websites for different user groups

; 

Part One: Eliciting the issues

The projects ....

Text

Project @pple

Newham Easyread

Factors affecting use of ICT: contextual

Massive enthusiasm

BUT Competing agendas Time constraints Lack of learning materials Lack of training / support

Issue elicited

Understanding of tasks

Resolution

Single actions only

Idiosyncratic behaviour

‘Experimental’ v naturalistic behaviour

Motivation •Set context •Used meaningful material•Emphasised engagement

Factors affecting use of ICT: terminal

Individual studies Study one: Effectiveness of images (in game playing) Study two: Navigation Study three: Information retrieval Study four: Capturing preference data (I’ll tell you later!)

Methods: ObservationThink aloud protocol (where possible)Informal interview

Study one: Understanding images

Had moderate LD: •Fair/good receptive language•Poor or no literacy

Aims: examine understanding of images test appropriateness and ease of use of

various games.

Participants:

Study one: Understanding images (Task 1)

Study one: Understanding images (Task 2)

Study two: NavigationAims:To determine Whether websites can be navigated effectively by

people with very low literacy skills If usability tests can be effective with such a

community

Participants: Again, had ‘moderate’ LD

Study two: NavigationProcedure: Hunt the treasure!

• (‘Find the man in the black hat...• click!…’• ‘Now find the box of treasure’• ‘write down the letter on the

box…’)

Study two: NavigationResults - Usability difficulties: Iconography Page-scrolling Horizontal v vertical menu

Results - Methodological issues: Role of the supporter

Study three: Information retrieval (IR)

Aims: To examine navigation, scrolling and IR. to elicit any methodological issues

Paricipants: Mild LD

Study three: Information retrieval (IR)

Tasks: Where will you find information about money? (scroll) How to you get the sound to play? (icon recognition) Can you go back to the previous page? (navigation)

Results Audio / text issue Text size v scrolling Menu bar position

From the results we can ask ... for example: ✦ What is more important - large text or minimising

scrolling? Do images help?

Study three: Information retrieval (IR)

Part two: compare and contrast …

Part two: comparing and optimising web interfaces

Pete’s lonesome trade-off

analysis

Part two: comparing and optimising web interfaces

Method (1):First, imagine 3 mobile phones … Which do you prefer?

Then whiz the results through a Conjoint Analysis

Method (2):Now imagine various web page designs: Absence or presence of images Menu position Text size

And in addition to preferences, performance

Part two: comparing and optimising web interfaces

Part two: comparing and optimising web interfaces

Example (Horizontal menu; with images; large text)

Part two: comparing and optimising web interfaces

Measures:✦ Time on task✦ Task success✦ Preference evaluations

Part two: comparing and optimising web interfaces

By the end of my study …… I should be able to reveal the optimum website

interface!!

Thanks for listening!

ReferencesMerson E, Hatton, C (2008) Estimating Future Need for Adult Social Care for People with Learning

Disabilities in England Project report, Centre for Disability Reserach, Lancaster University, Lancaster.

Foundation for People with Learning Disabilities (2007) Statistics about people with learning disabilities Available online at: http://www.learningdisabilities.org.uk/information/learning-disabilities-statistics/

Disability Rights Commission (2006) Equal Treatment: Closing the Gap London: Disability Rights Commission

Tarleton, B. (2004), The Road Ahead? Information for Young People with Learning Difficulties, Their Families and Supporters at Transition, Norah Fry Research Centre, University of Bristol, Bristol.

WHO (World Health Organisation) (2006)A Need Assessment of Health and Welfare among the Disabled for Community Based Rehabilitation in Jeju Available online at: http://www.wpro.who.int/internet/resources.ashx/HSE/occupational_health/jeju_CBR_2006_rep.pdf