 |
||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Features:
Related Sites:
The ITTATC is not responsible for the content of external web sites.
funded by:
(grant #H133A000405)
| 
|
*** ITTATC has reached the end of its 5-year grant, so (as of 5/15/06) this website is no longer being updated. Please be advised that the information on this site may be out of date. ***
| Accessible Design: Problems and Solutions A Literature Review to Support the ITTATC Needs Assessment |
Go back to Section 2: Literature Review Results
Go forward to D: Definition of Accessible Design
Print this page.
C: Benefits of Accessible Design
- Introduction
- C-1. How does industry benefit?
- C-2. How does government benefit?
- C-3. How do individuals with disabilities benefit?
- C-4. How do individuals without disabilities benefit?
Introduction
Accessible design benefits industry, government, and individuals with and without disabilities by providing a user interface that is both easier to use (and therefore more marketable to a larger population) and is tailored to the capabilities and limitations of the operator. Industry and government both benefit by having access to a larger workforce that is more diverse, efficient and productive. Accessible design provides tools to aid industry in marketing their products more widely and increasing their customer base (Clarkson & Keates, 2000). It also aids companies in meeting worldwide regulations and standards (IBM, n.d.). Government will benefit by having employees who are more informed, having more productive workers, and having more workers available for a larger number of positions (EIT Accessibility Standards, 2000).
Benefits to people with disabilities are numerous, and range from employment to education to mobility. Engelen, et al (1999) discuss the importance of accessible web sites, which can be used to disseminate a wealth of information. Namioka and Fisher (n.d.) discuss the benefits such as increased communications access, increased access to consumer products, and more equal treatment (employment, education).
There is a long history of individuals without disabilities benefiting from technologies designed for individuals with disabilities. The telephone and curb cuts provide only two examples (IBM, n.d.; Microsoft, n.d.; Norman, 1998). Vanderheiden (1990) discusses the faulty nature of designers' current tendency to design for the average individual. This approach actually leaves out a significant number of individuals, and accessible design can facilitate greater access for all. In the absence of other information, designers tend to design based on their own experience and capabilities.
Go back to the top of this page.
C-1. How does industry benefit?
Industry benefits from accessible design because this design practice results in increased target markets and more satisfied customers (IBM, n.d.; InClude, 1999; W3C, n.d.). In addition, designing for a wide range of abilities may help companies avoid costly lawsuits initiated by people who (rightfully) wish to be included in design decisions (Tedeschi, 2001; W3C, n.d.). By addressing the accessibility needs of older adults and individuals with disabilities, companies will have a connection to the disposable income of millions of individuals who are currently left out of design decisions (Clarkson, et al, 2000; TIA Access, 1996). Further, accessible design makes products easier to use, and thus more appealing to the population in general (TIA Access, 1996). Finally, the practice of accessible design supports innovative and competitive business practices while also making commercial products compliant with federal regulations (Access Board, n.d.). Additional benefits include increased efficiency when using WCAG guidelines and attracting recognition through demonstrating social responsibility (W3C, n.d.).
Clarkson, P. J., & Keates, S. (2000). I-design project (inclusive design for the whole population). Proceedings, Designing for the 21st Century II: An International Conference on Universal Design. Boston: Adaptive Environments Center.
IBM. (n.d.). Identifying reasons for producing accessible content and products. Retrieved, December 15, 2000, from the World Wide Web (link updated September 22, 2003): http://www.ibm.com/able/access_ibm/reasons.html
InClude. (1999, December). Handbook on Inclusive Design of Telematics Applications (Sections 1 through 3). Retrieved December 12, 2000, from the World Wide Web: http://www.stakes.fi/include/handbook.htm
Monterey Technologies, Inc. (September 9, 1996). Resource guide for accessible design of consumer electronics. Submitted to EIA-EIF Committee on Product Accessibility, A Joint Venture of the Electronic Industries Association and the Electronic Industries Foundation.
Tedeschi, B. (2001, January 1). E-Commerce Report. New York Times.
TIA Access. (1996, November). Resource guide for accessible design of consumer electronics. Electronic Industries Alliance/Electronic Industries Foundation. Retrieved January 9, 2001, from the World Wide Web: http://www.tiaonline.org/access/guide.html
W3C. (n.d.). Auxiliary benefits of accessible web design. Retrieved June 30, 2003, from the World Wide Web: http://www.w3.org/WAI/bcase/benefits.html
Go back to the top of this page.
C-2. How does government benefit?
The government benefits from more accessible electronic and information technology in three primary ways: increased productivity of federal employees with disabilities, reduced transaction costs associated with hiring individuals with disabilities, and increased productivity of federal employees without disabilities (ATCB, 2000). Currently, there is not much information documenting the specifics of how the government will benefit.
Electronic and Information Technology Accessibility Standards: Economic Assessment. (2000). Washington, D.C.: EOP Foundation.
Go back to the top of this page.
C-3. How do individuals with disabilities benefit?
Until the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, the needs of individuals with disabilities were excluded from the general design of living, work, and leisure environments as well as the design of personal technology. A long history of exclusion has resulted in a gap between the populations with and without disabilities with respect to economic access, technological access, employment and educational opportunities, personal independence, and social integration (Kaye, 1998, 2000a, 2000b). In spite of improvements in awareness about the barriers to access experienced by individuals with disabilities and the requirements of additional legislation, this gap persists (Kaye, 1998; Tedeschi, 2001).
While assistive devices have a long history of improving the capabilities of people with functional limitations (King, 1999; Scherer & Galvin, 1997), such technology is often expensive (ABLEDATA, 1994, 1999; King, 1999), difficult to use (King, 1999), and not easily integrated into mainstream environments and technology (Tedeschi, 2001). Further, retrofitted adaptations to environments and devices that have not been designed with a wide range of abilities in mind are often unappealing to the people for whom the modifications were intended, and makes the gap between populations with and without disabilities even more apparent (King, 1999).
Clearly, integrating the access needs of individuals with disabilities throughout the design process would serve to improve the quality of life for millions of Americans and citizens worldwide (IBM, n.d.; Microsoft, n.d.; Pacific Bell Network, 1996; Russell, et al, 1997). As is evident in several examples (RNIB, 2000; Taylor, 2000; TIA Access, 1999a, 1999b, 1999c), environments and products conforming to the principles of accessible design have already increased the access of individuals with disabilities to the economic and social world of their peers without disabilities.
Electronic and Information Technology Accessibility Standards: Economic Assessment. (2000). Washington, D.C.: EOP Foundation.
Engelen, J., Evenepoel, F., Bormans, G., et al. (COST219). (1999, October). Producing web pages that everyone can access. Retrieved December 12, 2000, from the World Wide Web: http://www.stakes.fi/cost219/webdesign.htm
Gill, J., Roe, P., & Martin, M. (COST219). (n.d.). Pay phones with immediate public access. Retrieved December 12, 2000, from the World Wide Web: http://www.stakes.fi/cost219/payphones.htm
Gjoderum, J., Hypponen, H., Nordby, K., Ruud, S., Ekberg, J., & Martin, M. (COST219). (n.d.). Guideline—Booklet on Mobile Phones. Retrieved December 12, 2000, from the World Wide Web: http://www.stakes.fi/cost219/mobiletelephone.htm
IBM. (n.d.). Identifying reasons for producing accessible content and products. Retrieved, December 15, 2000, from the World Wide Web (link updated September 22, 2003): http://www.ibm.com/able/access_ibm/reasons.html
InClude. (1999, December). Handbook on Inclusive Design of Telematics Applications (Sections 1 through 3). Retrieved December 12, 2000, from the World Wide Web: http://www.stakes.fi/include/handbook.htm
King, T. W. (1999). Assistive technology: Essential human factors. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
King & Thomas. (n.d.). Position papers on key processes regarding every-citizen interfaces in the nation's information infrastructure. Retrieved December 12, 2000, from the World Wide Web: http://stills.nap.edu/html/screen/15.html
Mercinelli, M. (COST219). (n.d.). Guidelines—Accessibility requirements for new telecommunication equipment. Retrieved December 12, 2000, from the World Wide Web: http://www.stakes.fi/cost219/smartphones.htm
Microsoft. (n.d.). Today's assistive technology, tomorrow's everyday convenience. Retrieved January 2, 2001, from the World Wide Web (link updated September 22, 2003): http://www.microsoft.com/enable/news/ada99.aspx
Namioka & Fisher. (n.d.). Position papers on application areas regarding every-citizen interfaces in the nation's information infrastructure. Retreived January 2, 2001, from the World Wide Web: http://stills.nap.edu/html/screen/13.html
Pacific Bell Network. (1996, June). Universal design policy. Retrieved January 4, 2001, from the World Wide Web: http://trace.wisc.edu/docs/pacbell_ud/agpd.htm
Scherer, M. J., & Galvin, J. C. (1997). Assistive technology. In S. Kumar (Ed.), Perspectives in rehabilitation ergonomics (pp.273-301). London: Taylor & Francis.
Simpson, J. (1996). How people who use electronic augmentative and alternative communication devices utilize telephony. An RERC Report. Retrieved December 12, 2000, from the World Wide Web: http://tap.gallaudet.edu/UCPA/default.htm
Taylor, H. (June 7, 2000). How the internet is improving the lives of Americans with disabilities. The Harris Poll. Retrieved January 2, 2001 from the World Wide Web: http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=93
Tedeschi, B. (2001, January 1). E-Commerce Report. New York Times.
TIA Access. (1996, November). Resource guide for accessible design of consumer electronics. Electronic Industries Alliance/Electronic Industries Foundation. Retrieved January 9, 2001, from the World Wide Web: http://www.tiaonline.org/access/guide.html
Vanderheiden, G. C. (In print). Telecommunications - accessibility and future directions. In Abascal, J., & Nicolle, C. (Eds.), Inclusive guidelines for HCI.
Go back to the top of this page.
C-4. How do individuals without disabilities benefit?
Accessible design benefits individuals without disabilities because it results in products that are generally easier to use and it results in more flexible products that can be used effectively in a wide array of environmental situations or circumstances (Vanderheiden, 1997). Such situations might include using a cell phone in a very noisy environment, or trying to discern telephone buttons in the dark. Further, users without disabilities who fall outside of the 95th percentile on various ergonomic characteristics (e.g., height) benefit from accessible design because it results in products that are designed for all people, not just the “average” user. In addition, “organizations” that must accommodate people with disabilities benefit through lower cost, and greater ease of finding and acquiring accessible technology.
IBM. (n.d.). Identifying reasons for producing accessible content and products. Retrieved, December 15, 2000, from the World Wide Web (link updated September 22, 2003): http://www.ibm.com/able/access_ibm/reasons.html
InClude. (1999, December). Handbook on Inclusive Design of Telematics Applications (Sections 1 through 3). Retrieved December 12, 2000, from the World Wide Web: http://www.stakes.fi/include/handbook.htm
Microsoft. (n.d.). Today's assistive technology, tomorrow's everyday convenience. Retrieved January 2, 2001, from the World Wide Web (link updated September 22, 2003): http://www.microsoft.com/enable/news/ada99.aspx
Norman, D. A. (1998). The invisible computer: Why good products can fail, the personal computer is so complex, and information appliances are the solution. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Tedeschi, B. (2001, January 1). E-Commerce Report. New York Times.
Vanderheiden, G. C. (In print). Telecommunications - accessibility and future directions. In Abascal, J., & Nicolle, C. (Eds.), Inclusive guidelines for HCI.
Vanderheiden, G. C. (1990). Thirty-something million: Should they be exceptions? Human Factors, 32, 383-396.
Go back to the top of this page. Go back to Section 2: Literature Review Results Go forward to D: Definition of Accessible Design