html5-img
1 / 20

Web Accessibility for the Blind:

Web Accessibility for the Blind:. Corporate Social Responsibility or Litigation Avoidance?. Jonathan Frank Suffolk University Boston, MA. Background. 45m. blind individuals worldwide 1.3m. blind individuals in US (0.48% pop.) Web Accessibility Guidelines & Laws Lawsuits.

nyla
Download Presentation

Web Accessibility for the Blind:

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Web Accessibility for the Blind: Corporate Social Responsibility or Litigation Avoidance? Jonathan Frank Suffolk University Boston, MA

  2. Background • 45m. blind individuals worldwide • 1.3m. blind individuals in US (0.48% pop.) • Web Accessibility Guidelines & Laws • Lawsuits

  3. Text Browser & Screen Reader

  4. Previous Work on Web Accessibility • Frustrated and annoyed blind users [Lazar et al, 2004] • Time-oriented accessibility ignored [Takagi 2004] • Website increasing complexity [Zeng et al 2004] • Developers use syntactical checking [Mankoff 2005] • Lack of training, client support, confusing guidelines, inadequate software tools [Lazar et al, 2004]

  5. Corporate Social Responsibility

  6. CSR Postures • Reactive • Defensive • Accommodative • Proactive

  7. CSR Propensity +/- Product/ Service Type + Website Accessibility (CSR Posture) Perceived Litigation Threat + + Time - Web Media Complexity + Model

  8. Measuring Accessibility • Enabling people with disabilities to perceive, understand, navigate, and interact with the Web” [Henry 2006] • Limitation of popular tools • Alternative approach -- aDesigner – IBM • navigability and listenability metrics

  9. Sample

  10. Method • Wayback Machine • Initially sampled 1st occurrence of homepage 4/03, 2/06, & 6/07

  11. Declining Accessibility

  12. Target Corp Improves Accessibility

  13. Worst Accessibility 2007

  14. Best Accessibility 2007

  15. Gains in Accessibility after Target Case Begins(Feb-06 to Jun-07)

  16. Retailers’ reaction to the Target case

  17. CSR Propensity & Accessibility

  18. Regression results t=1,2…7 Anova of Betas

  19. Conclusions

More Related