skip to main content
10.1145/2513383.2513446acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesassetsConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Physical accessibility of touchscreen smartphones

Authors Info & Claims
Published:21 October 2013Publication History

ABSTRACT

This paper examines the use of touchscreen smartphones, focusing on physical access. Using interviews and observations, we found that participants with dexterity impairment considered a smartphone both useful and usable, but tablet devices offer several important advantages. Cost is a major barrier to adoption. We describe usability problems that are not addressed by existing accessibility options, and observe that the dexterity demands of important accessibility features made them unusable for many participants. Despite participants' enthusiasm for both smartphones and tablet devices, their potential is not yet fully realized for this population.

References

  1. Anthony, L., Kim, Y., Findlater, L. 2013. Analyzing user-generated YouTube videos to understand touchscreen use by people with motor impairments. In Proceedings of CHI 2013, 1223--1232. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Comscore. 2013. Mobile Future in Focus 2013. Retrieved April 18, 2013, from Comscore: http://www.comscore.com/Insights/Presentations_and_Whitepapers/2013/2013_Mobile_Future_in_Focus.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Condado, A., Godinho, R., Zacaries, M., and Lobo, F. 2011. EasyWrite: A touch-based entry method for mobile devices. In Proc. INTERACT 2011 Workshop on Mobile Accessibility (MOBACC 2011), Lisbon, Portugal, 1--8.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Davis, F. and Venkatesh, V. 1996. A critical assessment of potential measurement biases in the technology acceptance model: three experiments. Int. Journal of Human-Computer Studies 45, 19--45. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Ericsson. 2012. Ericsson Mobility Report on the Pulse of the Networked Society. Retrieved April, 2013, from Ericsson: http://www.ericsson.com/res/docs/2012/ericsson-mobility-report-november-2012.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. 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 Proc. 9th Int. ACM SIGACCESS Conf. on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS '07). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 19--26. DOI=10.1145/1296843.1296849. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Hager, E. IPad opens world to a disabled boy, New York Times, 2010. Retrieved April, 2013, from http://66.77.252.5/content/files/iPad_opens_world_to_disabled_boy.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Kane, S. K., Jayant, C., Wobbrock, J. O., and Ladner, R. E. 2009. Freedom to roam: a study of mobile device adoption and accessibility for people with visual and motor disabilities. In Proc. 11th Int. ACM SIGACCESS Conf. on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS '09). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 115--122. DOI=10.1145/1639642.1639663. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Krigger, K. 2006. Cerebral Palsy: An overview. American Family Physician 73(1), American Academy of Family Physicians, 91--100. Retrieved May 2013 at www.aafp.org/afp.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Kurniawan, S. 2008. Older people and mobile phones: A multi-method investigation. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 66 (12), 889--901. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. National Council on Disability. 2013. Medicaid Managed Care for People with Disabilities: Policy and Implementation Considerations for State and Federal Policymakers. Retrieved on April 16, 2013 from http://www.ncd.gov/publications/2013/20130315/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Nicolau, H., and Jorge, J. 2012. Elderly text-entry performance on touchscreens. In Proc. 14th Int. ACM SIGACCESS Conf. on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS '12). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 127--134. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Odding, E., Roebroeck, M. and Stam, H. 2006. The epidemiology of cerebral palsy: Incidence, impairments and risk factors. Disability and Rehabilitation 28(4), 183--191.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Sesto, M. E., Irwin, C. B., Chen, K. B., Chourasia, A. O. and Wiegmann, D. A. 2012. Effect of Touch Screen Button Size and Spacing on Touch Characteristics of Users With and Without Disabilities Human Factors. The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 2012 54: 425.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Trewin, S., Keates, S., and Moffatt, K. 2007. Individual responses to a method of cursor assistance. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology 3(1-2), 2--21, Informa UK Ltd UK, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Wacharamanotham, C., Hurtmanns, J., Mertens, A., Kronenbuerger, M., Schlick, C., and Borchers, J. 2011. Evaluating swabbing: a touchscreen input method for elderly users with tremor. In Proceedings of CHI 2011, 623--626. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Wobbrock, J. O., Myers, B. A., and Kembel, J. A. 2003. EdgeWrite: a stylus-based text entry method designed for high accuracy and stability of motion. In Proc. 16th annual ACM Symposium on User interface software and technology (UIST '03). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 61--7 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Physical accessibility of touchscreen smartphones

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

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

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      ASSETS '13: Proceedings of the 15th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility
      October 2013
      343 pages
      ISBN:9781450324052
      DOI:10.1145/2513383

      Copyright © 2013 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: 21 October 2013

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      ASSETS '13 Paper Acceptance Rate28of98submissions,29%Overall Acceptance Rate436of1,556submissions,28%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader