skip to main content
research-article

Ability-Based Design: Concept, Principles and Examples

Published:01 April 2011Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Current approaches to accessible computing share a common goal of making technology accessible to users with disabilities. Perhaps because of this goal, they may also share a tendency to centralize disability rather than ability. We present a refinement to these approaches called ability-based design that consists of focusing on ability throughout the design process in an effort to create systems that leverage the full range of human potential. Just as user-centered design shifted the focus of interactive system design from systems to users, ability-based design attempts to shift the focus of accessible design from disability to ability. Although prior approaches to accessible computing may consider users’ abilities to some extent, ability-based design makes ability its central focus. We offer seven ability-based design principles and describe the projects that inspired their formulation. We also present a research agenda for ability-based design.

References

  1. Appert, C., Chapuis, O., and Beaudouin-Lafon, M. 2008. Evaluation of pointing performance on screen edges. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces (AVI’08). ACM Press, 119--126. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Bates, R. and Istance, H. O. 2003. Why are eye mice unpopular? A detailed comparison of head and eye controlled assistive technology pointing devices. Univ. Access Inform. Soc. 2, 3, 280--290.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Bigham, J. P. and Prince, C. M. 2007. WebAnywhere: A screen reader on-the-go. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS’07). ACM Press, 225--226. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Bigham, J. P., Prince, C. M., and Ladner, R. E. 2008. WebAnywhere: A screen reader on-the-go. In Proceedings of the ACM International Cross-Disciplinary Conference on Web Accessibility (W4A’08). ACM Press, 73--82. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Bigham, J. P., Chisholm, W., and Ladner, R. E. 2010. WebAnywhere: Experiences with a new delivery model for access technology. In Proceedings of the ACM International Cross-Disciplinary Conference on Web Accessibility (W4A’10). ACM Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Biswas, P. and Robinson, P. 2008. Automatic evaluation of assistive interfaces. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI’08). ACM Press, 247--256. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Bonner, M. N., Brudvik, J. T., Abowd, G. D., and Edwards, W. K. 2010. No-Look notes: Accessible eyesfree multi-touch text entry. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Pervasive Computing (Pervasive’10). Springer-Verlag, 409--426. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Carter, S., Hurst, A., Mankoff, J., and Li, J. 2006. Dynamically adapting GUIs to diverse input devices. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGACESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS’06). ACM Press, 63--70. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Casali, S. P. 1992. Cursor control device performance by persons with physical disabilities: Implications for hardware and software design. In Proceedings of the 36th Annual Meeting of the Human Factors Society. Human Factors Society, 311--315.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Casali, S. P. 1995. A physical skills based strategy for choosing an appropriate interface method. In ExtraOrdinary Human-Computer Interaction: Interfaces for Users with Disabilities, A. D. N. Edwards Ed., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 315--341. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Chapuis, O., Blanch, R., and Beaudouin-Lafon, M. 2007. Fitts’ law in the wild: A field study of aimed movements. LRJ Tech. rep.1480. Université de Paris Sud, Orsay, France.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Chickowski, E. 2004. It’s all about access. Alaska Airlines Mag. 28, 12, 26--31, 80--82.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Choudhury, T., Borriello, G., Consolvo, S., Haehnel, D., Harrison, B., Hemingway, B., Hightower, J., Klasnja, P., Koscher, K., LaMarca, A., Landay, J. A., Legrand, L., Lester, J., Rahimi, A., Rea, A., and Wyatt, D. 2008. The mobile sensing platform: An embedded activity recognition system. IEEE Pervas. Comput. 7, 2, 32--41. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Cook, A. M. and Hussey, S. M. 2002. Assistive Technologies. Principles and Practice. 2nd Ed. Mosby, St. Louis.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Dawe, M. 2004. Complexity, cost and customization: Uncovering barriers to adoption of assistive technology. Refereed Poster at the ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS’04).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Dixon, M. and Fogarty, J. A. 2010. Prefab: Implementing advanced behaviors using pixel-based reverse engineering of interface structure. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’10). ACM Press, 1525--1534. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Edwards, A. D. N. 1995. Computers and people with disabilities. In Extraordinary Human-Computer Interaction: Interfaces for Users with Disabilities, A. D. N. Edwards Ed., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 19--43. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Evenson, S., Rheinfrank, J., and Dubberly, H. 2010. Ability-centered design: From static to adaptive worlds. Interactions 17, 6, 75--79. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Farris, J. S., Jones, K. S., and Anders, B. A. 2001. Acquisition speed with targets on the edge of the screen: An application of Fitts’ Law to commonly used web browser controls. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 45th Annual Meeting (HFES’01). Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 1205--1209.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Farris, J. S., Jones, K. S., and Anders, B. A. 2002a. Using impenetrable borders in a graphical web browser: How does distance influence target selection speed? In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 46th Annual Meeting (HFES’02). Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 1300--1304.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Farris, J. S., Jones, K. S., and Anders, B. A. 2002b. Using impenetrable borders in a graphical web browser: Are all angles equal? In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 46th Annual Meeting (HFES’02). Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 1251--1255.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Fichten, C. S., Barile, M., Asuncion, J. V,. and Fossey, M. E. 2000. What government, agencies, and organizations can do to improve access to computers for postsecondary students with disabilities: Recommendations based on Canadian empirical data. Int. J. Rehab. Resear. 23, 3, 191--199.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Findlater, L. and McGrenere, J. 2004. A comparison of static, adaptive, and adaptable menus. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’04). ACM Press, 89--96. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Findlater, L., Moffatt, K., McGrenere, J., and Dawson, J. 2009. Ephemeral adaptation: The use of gradual onset to improve menu selection performance. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’09). ACM Press, 1655--1664. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Fitts, P. M. 1954. The information capacity of the human motor system in controlling the amplitude of movement. J. Exper. Psych. 47, 6, 381--391.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Friedman, B., Kahn, P. H. and Borning, A. 2006. Value sensitive design and information systems. In Human-Computer Interaction in Management Information Systems: Foundations, D. Galletta and P. Zhang Eds., M. E. Sharpe, Armonk, NY, 348--372.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Froehlich, J., Wobbrock, J. O., and Kane, S. K. 2007. Barrier pointing: Using physical edges to assist target acquisition on mobile device touch screens. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS’07). ACM Press, 19--26. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Gajos, K. and Weld, D. S. 2004. SUPPLE: Automatically generating user interfaces. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI’04). ACM Press, 93--100. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Gajos, K. and Weld, D. S. 2005. Preference elicitation for interface optimization. In Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST’05). ACM Press, 173--182. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Gajos, K. and Weld, D. S. 2006. Automatically generating custom user interfaces for users with physical disabilities In Proceedings of the ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS’06). ACM Press, 243--244. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Gajos, K. Z., Wobbrock, J. O., and Weld, D. S. 2007. Automatically generating user interfaces adapted to users’ motor and vision capabilities. In Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST’07). ACM Press, 231--240. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Gajos, K. Z., Wobbrock, J. O., and Weld, D. S. 2008. Improving the performance of motor-impaired users with automatically-generated, ability-based interfaces. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’08). ACM Press, 1257--1266. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Gajos, K. Z., Weld, D. S., and Wobbrock, J. O. 2010. Automatically generating personalized user interfaces with SUPPLE. Artif. Intel. 174, 12--13, 910--950. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Goette, T. 1998. Factors leading to the successful use of voice recognition technology. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCAPH Conference on Assistive Technologies (ASSETS’98). ACM Press, 189--196. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Gould, J. D. and Lewis, C. 1985. Designing for usability: Key principles and what designers think. Comm. ACM 28, 3, 300--311. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Gross, D. P. 2004. Measurement properties of performance-based assessment of functional capacity. J. Occup. Rehab. 14, 3, 165--174.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. Harada, S., Landay, J. A., Malkin, J., Li, X., and Bilmes, J. A. 2006. The vocal joystick: Evaluation of voice-based cursor control techniques. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS’06). ACM Press, 197--204. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Harada, S., Wobbrock, J. O., and Landay, J. A. 2007. VoiceDraw: A hands-free voice-driven drawing application for people with motor impairments. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS’07). ACM Press, 27--34. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Harper, S. 2007. Is there design for all? Univ. Access Inform. Soc. 6, 1, 111--113. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Harris, C. M. and Wolpert, D. M. 1998. Signal-dependent noise determines motor planning. Nature 394, 780--784.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  41. Hazard, B. L. 2008. Separate but equal? A comparison of content on library web pages and their text versions. J. Web Librarian. 2, 2--3, 417--428.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  42. Hinckley, K., Pierce, J., Sinclair, M., and Horvitz, E. 2000. Sensing techniques for mobile interaction. In Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST’00). ACM Press, New York, 91--100. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. Hurst, A., Hudson, S. E., and Mankoff, J. 2007. Dynamic detection of novice vs. skilled use without a task model. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’07). ACM Press, 271--280. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  44. Hurst, A., Hudson, S. E., Mankoff, J., and Trewin, S. 2008a. Automatically detecting pointing performance. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI’08). ACM Press, 11--19. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. Hurst, A., Mankoff, J., and Hudson, S. E. 2008b. Understanding pointing problems in real world computing environments. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS’08). ACM Press, 43--50. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. Hurst, A., Hudson, S. E., and Mankoff, J. 2010. Automatically identifying targets users interact with during real world tasks. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI’10). ACM Press, 11--20. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. Hwang, F., Keates, S., Langdon, P., Clarkson, P. J., and Robinson, P. 2001. Perception and haptics: Towards more accessible computers for motion-impaired users. In Proceedings of the ACM Workshop on Perceptive User Interfaces (PUI’01). ACM Press, New York, 1--9. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. Hwang, F., Keates, S., Langdon, P., and Clarkson, P. J. 2004. Mouse movements of motion-impaired users: A submovement analysis. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS’04). ACM Press, New York, 102--109. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  49. Jipp, M., Badreddin, E., Abkai, C., and Hesser, J. 2008a. Individual ability-based system configuration: Cognitive profiling with Bayesian networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics (SMC’08). IEEE Press, 3359--3364.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. Jipp, M., Wagner, A., and Badreddin, E. 2008b. Individual ability-based system design of dependable human-technology interaction. In Proceedings of the 17th IFAC World Congress (IFAC’08). Elsevier Ltd., 14779--14784.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  51. Jipp, M., Bartolein, C., and Badreddin, E. 2009a. Predictive validity of wheelchair driving behavior for fine motor abilities: Definition of input variables for an adaptive wheelchair system. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics (SMC’09). IEEE Press, 39--44. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  52. Jipp, M., Bartolein, C., Badreddin, E., Abkai, C., and Hesser, J. 2009b. Psychomotor profiling with Bayesian neworks: Prediction of user abilities based on inputs of motorized wheelchair parameters. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics (SMC’09). IEEE Press, 1680--1685. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  53. Johnson, B. R., Farris, J. S., and Jones, K. S. 2003. Selection of web browser controls with and without impenetrable borders: Does width make a difference? In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 47th Annual Meeting (HFES’03). Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 1380--1384.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  54. Kane, S. K., Bigham, J. P., and Wobbrock, J. O. 2008a. Slide Rule: Making mobile touch screens accessible to blind people using multi-touch interaction techniques. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS’08). ACM Press, 73--80. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  55. Kane, S. K., Wobbrock, J. O., Harniss, M., and Johnson, K. L. 2008b. TrueKeys: Identifying and correcting typing errors for people with motor impairments. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI’08). ACM Press, 349--352. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  56. Kane, S. K., Wobbrock, J. O., and Smith, I. E. 2008c. Getting off the treadmill: Evaluating walking user interfaces for mobile devices in public spaces. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services (MobileHCI’08). ACM Press, 109--118. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  57. Keates, S., Clarkson, P. J., Harrison, L.-A., and Robinson, P. 2000. Towards a practical inclusive design approach. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Universal Usability (CUU’00). ACM Press, New York, 45--52. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  58. Keates, S., Langdon, P., Clarkson, P. J., and Robinson, P. 2002. User models and user physical capability. User Model. User-Adapt. Interact. 12, 2--3, 139--169. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  59. Keates, S. and Clarkson, P. J. 2003. Countering design exclusion through inclusive design. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Universal Usability (CUU’03). ACM Press, 69--76. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  60. Keates, S. and Clarkson, P. J. 2004. Countering Design Exclusion: An Introduction to Inclusive Design. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  61. Keates, S., Trewin, S., and Paradise, J. 2005. Using pointing devices: Quantifying differences across user groups. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (HCI’05). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  62. Kelley, D. and Hartfield, B. 1996. The designer’s stance. In Bringing Design to Software, T. Winograd Ed., Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 151--170. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  63. Koester, H. H. 2003. Abandonment of speech recognition by new users. In Proceedings of the RESNA 26th Annual Conference (RESNA’03). RESNA Press, Arlington, VA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  64. Koester, H. H., Lopresti, E. F., Ashlock, G., McMillan, W. W., Moore, P., and Simpson, R. C. 2003. Compass: Software for computer skills assessment. In Proceedings of the 18th Annual Conference on Technology and Persons with Disabilities (CSUN’03).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  65. Koester, H. H., Lopresti, E. F., and Simpson, R. C. 2005. Toward Goldilocks’ pointing device: Determining a “just right” gain sening for users with physical impairments. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS’05). ACM Press, 84--89. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  66. Koester, H. H., Lopresti, E. F., and Simpson, R. C. 2006. Measurement validity for Compass assessment software. In Proceedings of the RESNA 29th Annual Conference (RESNA’06). RESNA Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  67. Koester, H. H., Lopresti, E. F., and Simpson, R. C. 2007a. Toward automatic adjustment of keyboard settings for people with physical impairments. Disab. Rehab. Assist. Techn. 2, 5, 261--274.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  68. Koester, H. H., Simpson, R. C., Spaeth, D. M., and Lopresti, E. F. 2007b. Reliability and validity of Compass software for access assessment. In Proceedings of the RESNA 30th Annual Conference (RESNA’07). RESNA Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  69. Kondraske, G. V. 1988a. Workplace design: An elemental resource approach to task analysis and human performance measurements. In Proceedings of the International Conference of the Association for the Advancement of Rehabilitation Technology (ICAART’88). RESNA Press, 608--611.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  70. Kondraske, G. V. 1988b. Rehabilitation engineering: Towards a systematic process. IEEE Engin. Medic. Bio. Mag. 7, 3, 11--15.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  71. Kondraske, G. V. 1990a. A PC-based performance measurement laboratory system. J. Clinic. Engin. 15, 6, 467--478.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  72. Kondraske, G. V. 1990b. Quantitative measurement and assessment of performance. In Rehabilitation Engineering, J. H. Leslie and R. V. Smith Eds., CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 101--125.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  73. Kondraske, G. V. 1995. A working model for human system-task interfaces. In The Biomedical Engineering Handbook, J. D. Bronzino Ed., CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2157--2174.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  74. Law, C. M., Sears, A., and Price, K. J. 2005. Issues in the categorization of disabilities for user testing. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (HCI’05). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  75. Lazar, J. 2007. Universal Usability: Designing Computer Interfaces for Diverse Users. John Wiley & Sons, West Sussex, UK, 610. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  76. Levenshtein, V. I. 1965. Binary codes capable of correcting deletions, insertions, and reversals. Doklady Akademii Nauk SSSR 163, 4, 845--848.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  77. Lin, M., Goldman, R., Price, K. J., Sears, A., and Jacko, J. 2007. “How do people tap when walking” An empirical investigation of nomadic data entry. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 65, 9, 759--769. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  78. Mace, R. L., Hardie, G. J., and Place, J. P. 1991. Accessible environments: Toward universal design. In Design Intervention: Toward a More Humane Architecture, W. E. Preiser, J. C. Vischer, and E. T. White Eds., Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  79. MacKenzie, I. S. and Isokoski, P. 2008. Fitts’ throughput and the speed-accuracy trade-off. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’08). ACM Press, 1633--1636. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  80. Matheson, L. N. 2004. History, design characteristics, and uses of the pictorial activity and task sorts. J. Occup. Rehab. 14, 3, 175--195.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  81. Moffatt, K. and McGrenere, J. 2010. Steadied-bubbles: Combining techniques to address pen-based pointing errors for younger and older adults. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’10). ACM Press, 1125--1134. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  82. Mustonen, T., Olkkonen, M., and Hakkinen, J. 2004. Examining mobile phone text legibility while walking. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’04). ACM Press, New York, 1243--1246. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  83. Newell, A. F. 1995. Extra-ordinary human-computer interaction. In Extraordinary Human-Computer Interaction: Interfaces for Users with Disabilities, A. D. N. Edwards Ed., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 3--18. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  84. Newell, A. F. and Gregor, P. 2000. User sensitive inclusive design-in search of a new paradigm. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Universal Usability (CUU’00). ACM Press, 39--44. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  85. Persad, U., Langdon, P., and Clarkson, J. 2007. Characterising user capabilities to support inclusive design evaluation. Univ. Access Inform. Soc. 6, 2, 119--135. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  86. Potter, R. L., Weldon, L. J., and Shneiderman, B. 1988. Improving the accuracy of touch screens: An experimental evaluation of three strategies. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’88). ACM Press, 27--32. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  87. Pransky, G. S. and Dempsey, P. G. 2004. Practical aspects of functional capacity evaluations. J. Occup. Rehab. 14, 3, 217--229.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  88. Price, K. J. and Sears, A. 2008. Performance-based functional assessment: An algorithm for measuring physical capabilities. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  89. Ringbauer, B., Peissner, M., and Gemou, M. 2007. From “design for all” towards “design for one”---A modular user interface approach. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction (UAHCI’07). Springer-Verlag, 517--526. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  90. Schwesig, C., Poupyrev, I., and Morl, E. 2004. Gummi: A bendable computer. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’04). ACM Press, New York, 263--270. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  91. Sears, A. and Shneiderman, B. 1991. High precision touchscreens: Design strategies and comparisons with a mouse. Int. J. Man-Mach. Stud. 34, 4, 593--613. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  92. Sears, A., Lin, M., Jacko, J., and Xiao, Y. 2003. When computers fade. Pervasive computing and situationally-induced impairments and disabilities. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (HCI’03). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, 1298--1302.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  93. Sears, A., Young, M., and Feng, J. 2008. Physical disabilities and computing technologies: An analysis of impairments. In The Human-Computer Interaction Handbook, J. A. Jacko and A. Sears Eds., Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New York, 829--852.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  94. Shinohara, K. and Tenenberg, J. 2007. Observing Sara: A case study of a blind person’s interactions with technology. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS’07). ACM Press, 171--178. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  95. Shinohara, K. and Wobbrock, J. O. 2011. In the shadow of misperception: Assistive technology use and social interactions. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’11). ACM Press, To appear. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  96. Shneiderman, B. 2000. Universal usability. Comm. ACM 43, 5, 84--91. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  97. Smith, R. V. and Leslie, J. H. 1990. Rehabilitation Engineering. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  98. Smith, S. S. and Kondraske, G. V. 1987. Computerized system for quantitative measurement of sensorimotor aspects of human performance. Phys. Ther. 67, 12, 1860--1866.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  99. Stary, C. 1997. The role of design and evaluation principles for user interfaces for all. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (HCI’97). Elsevier Science, New York, 477--480. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  100. Steinfeld, E. 1994. The concept of universal design. In Proceedings of the 6th Ibero-American Conference on Accessibility.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  101. Stephanidis, C. 2001a. User interfaces for all: Concepts, methods, and tools. Human Factors and Ergonomics Series, G. Salvendy Ed., Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, 728. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  102. Stephanidis, C. 2001b. Adaptive techniques for universal access. User model. User-Adapt. Interact. 11, 1--2, 159--179. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  103. Stephanidis, C., Akoumianakis, D., and Savidis, A. 1995. Design representations and development support for user interface adaptation. In Proceedings of the 1st ERCIM Workshop on User Interfaces for All (UI4All’95). ICS-FORTH.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  104. Stephanidis, C., Salvendy, G., Smith, M. J., and Koubek, R. J. 1997. Towards the next generation of UIST: Developing for all users. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (HCI’97). Elsevier Science, New York, 473--476. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  105. Stephanidis, C., Salvendy, G., Akoumianakis, D., Bevan, N., Brewer, J., Emiliani, P. L., Galetsas, A., Haataja, S., Iakovidis, I., Jacko, J. A., Jenkins, P., Karshmer, A. I., Korn, P., Marcus, A., Murphy, H. J., Stary, C., Vanderheiden, G., Weber, G., and Ziegler, J. 1998. Toward an information society for all: An international R&D agenda. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 10, 2, 107--134.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  106. Story, M. F. 1998. Maximizing usability: The principles of universal design. Assist. Techn. 10, 1, 412.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  107. Terry, M. and Mynatt, E. D. 2002. Side views: Persistent, on-demand previews for open-ended tasks. In Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST’02). ACM Press, 71--80. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  108. Trewin, S. 2002. An invisible keyguard. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCAPH Conference on Assistive Technologies (ASSETS’02). ACM Press, 143--149. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  109. Trewin, S. and Pain, H. 1997. Dynamic modelling of keyboard skills: Supporting users with motor disabilities. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on User Modeling (UM’97). Springer, 135--146.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  110. Trewin, S. and Pain, H. 1999. Keyboard and mouse errors due to motor disabilities. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 50, 2,109--144. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  111. Trewin, S., Keates, S., and Moffatt, K. 2006. Developing steady clicks: A method of cursor assistance for people with motor impairments. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS’06). ACM Press, 26--33. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  112. Vanderheiden, G. 1998. Universal design and assistive technology in communication and information technologies: Alternatives or complements? Assist. Techn. 10, 1, 29--36.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  113. Vanderheiden, G. 2000. Fundamental principles and priority~ setting for universal usability. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Universal Usability (CUU’00). ACM Press, 32--37. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  114. Vogel, D. and Baudisch, P. 2007. Shift: A technique for operating pen-based interfaces using touch. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’07). ACM Press, 657--666. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  115. Walker, N. and Smelcer, J. B. 1990. A comparison of selection time from walking and bar menus. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’90). ACM Press, New York, 221--225. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  116. Walker, N., Philbin, D. A., and Fisk, A. D. 1997. Age-related differences in movement control: Adjusting submovement structure to optimize performance. J. Geront. Psych. Sci. 52B, 1, 40--52.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  117. Wang, J. and Mankoff, J. 2003. Theoretical and architectural support for input device adaptation. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Universal Usability (CUU’03). ACM Press, New York, 85--92. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  118. Wobbrock, J. O. 2003. The benefits of physical edges in gesture-making: Empirical support for an edge-based unistroke alphabet. In Extended Abstracts of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’03). ACM Press, New York, 942--943. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  119. Wobbrock, J. O. 2006. The future of mobile device research in HCI. In CHI Workshop Proceedings: What is the Next Generation of Human-Computer Interaction? 131--134.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  120. Wobbrock, J. O. and Gajos, K. Z. 2007. A comparison of area pointing and goal crossing for people with and without motor impairments. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS’07). ACM Press, 3--10. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  121. Wobbrock, J. O. and Myers, B. A. 2006a. From letters to words: Efficient stroke-based word completion for trackball text entry. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS’06). ACM Press, New York, 2--9. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  122. Wobbrock, J. O. and Myers, B. A. 2006b. Trackball text entry for people with motor impairments. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’06). ACM Press, New York, 479--488. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  123. Wobbrock, J. O. and Myers, B. A. 2006c. Analyzing the input stream for character-level errors in unconstrained text entry evaluations. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact. 13, 4, 458--489. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  124. Wobbrock, J. O. and Myers, B. A. 2007. Enabling devices, empowering people: The design and evaluation of Trackball EdgeWrite. Disab. Rehab. Assist. Techn. 2, 4, 1--22.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  125. Wobbrock, J. O., Myers, B. A., and Hudson, S. E. 2003a. Exploring edge-based input techniques for handheld text entry. In Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems Workshops (ICDCSW’03). IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, CA, 280--282. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  126. Wobbrock, J. O., Myers, B. A., and Kembel, J. A. 2003b. EdgeWrite: A stylus-based text entry method designed for high accuracy and stability of motion. In Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST’03). ACM Press, New York, 61--70. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  127. Wobbrock, J. O., Aung, H. H., Rothrock, B., and Myers, B. A. 2005. Maximizing the guessability of symbolic input. In Extended Abstracts of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’05). ACM Press, New York, 1869--1872. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  128. Wobbrock, J. O., Fogarty, J., Liu, S.-Y., Kimuro, S., and Harada, S. 2009. The Angle Mouse: Target-agnostic dynamic gain adjustment based on angular deviation. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’09). ACM Press, 1401--1410. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  129. World Health Organization. 2009. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). WHO Press, Geneva, Switzerland.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  130. Yamabe, T. and Takahashi, K. 2007. Experiments in mobile user interface adaptation for walking users. In Proceedings of the Conference on Intelligent Pervasive Computing (IPC’07). IEEE Computer Society, 280--284. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  131. Yesilada, Y., Harper, S., Chen, T., and Trewin, S. 2010. Small-device users situationally impaired by input. Comput. Hum. Behav. 26, 3, 427--435. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Ability-Based Design: Concept, Principles and Examples

      Recommendations

      Reviews

      Molisa D. Derk

      Ability-based design takes a different approach to adapting computer systems for users with less-than-ideal computer interaction abilities, whether from a recognized disability, a particular situation, or in any other context. The design concept has two primary ideas. First, the system must adapt, rather than the user. Second, the adaptation can and should be for a particular user, reflecting his or her own ability levels. The focus is on taking advantage of the abilities of the user, not the disabilities. This paper outlines design principles for ability-based design, with numerous concrete examples. A wide range of applications is discussed, including keyboarding assists, voice-directed mouse manipulation, and a creative software package that enables the blind to use touch screens on mobile devices such as iPods. I recommend this paper to anyone with an interest in this area. Online Computing Reviews Service

      Access critical reviews of Computing literature here

      Become a reviewer for Computing Reviews.

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in

      Full Access

      • Published in

        cover image ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing
        ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing  Volume 3, Issue 3
        April 2011
        88 pages
        ISSN:1936-7228
        EISSN:1936-7236
        DOI:10.1145/1952383
        Issue’s Table of Contents

        Copyright © 2011 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 1 April 2011
        • Revised: 1 December 2010
        • Accepted: 1 December 2010
        • Received: 1 June 2010
        Published in taccess Volume 3, Issue 3

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article
        • Research
        • Refereed

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader