Modeling Accessibility: Characterizing What We Mean by “Accessible”
Kelly Avery Mack1, Jesse Martinez2, Aaleyah Lewis2, Jennifer Mankoff2, James Fogarty2, Leah Findlater1, Heather D. Evans3, Cynthia L. Bennett4, Emma J. McDonnell5
Motivation and Method
What type of access barrier does a tool address?
What contextual factors are most relevant?
Accessibility research is diverse in its aim of “making the world more accessible.” However, what it means to make something accessible has not been formally defined. We interviewed 25 people with a diverse range of disabilities and other marginalized identities about their experience using assistive technologies. From this data, we developed a process for modeling accessibility
Failure point: Tool makes a task that is not possible for a user possible by providing support.
Usability barrier: Tool helps the user perform a task in a way that is more aligned with their preferences (e.g., faster, slower, easier, harder).
Bodymind barrier: Tool helps adjust the user’s bodymind to a more preferred state (e.g., more focused, less pain).
Future impact barrier: Tool helps provide information that makes dealing with or planning for future barriers more possible.
Contextual factors determine what constitutes an access barrier, the experience of an access barrier, and experience using assistive technologies. Consider both identity and nonidentity factors.
Identity factors: demographics (age, class, gender, race), relationships (friend, parent, partner), activities (activist, athlete, maker).
Nonidentity factors: insurance, location, social environment, policy, stigma
1. UW Human Centered Design and Engineering, 2. UW Computer Science and Engineering, 3. UW Rehabilitation Medicine 4. Google Research 5. UW Biomedical Informatics and Medical Education