Kristen Shinohara
Jacob O. Wobbrock
Wanda Pratt
ABSTRACT
Personal technologies are rarely designed to be accessible to disabled people, partly due to the perceived challenge of including disability in design. Through design workshops, we addressed this challenge by infusing user-centered design activities with Design for Social Accessibility-a perspective emphasizing social aspects of accessibility-to investigate how professional designers can leverage social factors to include accessibility in design. We focused on how professional designers incorporated Design for Social Accessibility's three tenets: (1) to work with users with and without visual impairments; (2) to consider social and functional factors; (3) to employ tools-a framework and method cards-to raise awareness and prompt reflection on social aspects toward accessible design. We then interviewed designers about their workshop experiences. We found DSA to be an effective set of tools and strategies incorporating social/functional and non/disabled perspectives that helped designers create accessible design.
- Jane Bringolf. 2008. Universal design: is it accessible? Multi: The Journal of Plurality and Diversity in Design 1, 2.Google Scholar
- Julian Brinkley, Brianna Posadas, Julia Woodward, and Juan E. Gilbert. 2017. Opinions and Preferences of Blind and Low Vision Consumers Regarding Self-Driving Vehicles: Results of Focus Group Discussions. In Proc. ASSETS '17, 290--299. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Tim Brown. 2008. Design Thinking. Harvard business review 86, 6: 84--92.Google Scholar
- Sheryl Burgstahler. 2015. Universal design in higher education: from principles to practice. Cambridge, Massachusetts?: Harvard Education Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
- Betty Rose Connell, Mike Jones, Ron Mace, Jim Mueller, Abir Mullick, Elaine Ostroff, Jon Sanford, Ed Steinfeld, Molly Story, and Gregg Vanderheiden. 1997. The Principles of Universal Design. Retrieved from https://www.ncsu.edu/ncsu/design/cud/about_ud/udprinciplestext.htmGoogle Scholar
- Nigel Cross. 1982. Designerly ways of knowing. Special Issue Design Education 3, 4: 221--227.Google Scholar
- Nigel Cross. 201 Design thinking?: understanding how designers think and work. Berg, Oxford; New York.Google Scholar
- Lennard Davis. 2010. Constructing Normalcy. In The Disability Studies Reader (Third Edition). Taylor & Francis, 3--19.Google Scholar
- Jason Dearen. 2018. Driverless cars give hope to blind - are automakers onboard? Sacramento Bee. Retrieved April 17, 2018 from http://www.sacbee.com/news/article208779379.htmlGoogle Scholar
- Elizabeth DePoy and Stephen Gilson. 2014. Branding and designing disability: reconceptualising disability studies. Abingdon, Oxon?: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Barney G. Glaser and Anselm L. Strauss. 1967. The Discovery of Grounded Theory. Aldine Publishing Co, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
- Erving Goffman. 1963. Stigma. Englewood Cliffs, N.J., Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.Google Scholar
- Elizabeth Goodman, Erik Stolterman, and Ron Wakkary. 2011. Understanding interaction design practices. In Proc CHI '11, 1061--1070. Google ScholarDigital Library
- John D. Gould and Clayton Lewis. 1985. Designing for usability: Key principles and what designers think. CACM 28, 3: 300--311. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Joan M. Greenbaum and Morten Kyng. 1991. Design at work: cooperative design of computer systems. Erlbaum Assoc., Hillsdale, N.J. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Maya Haynes. 2015. Use Your Head! Microsoft's HoloLens. Aidis Trust Blog. Retrieved from http://blog.aidis.org/use-your-head-microsofts-hololensGoogle Scholar
- Cliff Kuang. 2016. Microsoft's Radical Bet on a New Type of Design Thinking. The Big Idea. Retrieved September 11, 2016 from https://www.fastcodesign.com/3054927/the-big-idea/microsofts-inspiring-bet-on-a-radical-new-type-of-design-thinkingGoogle Scholar
- L. Tonin, T. Carlson, R. Leeb, and J. del R. Millán. 2011. Brain-controlled telepresence robot by motor-disabled people. In 2011 Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, 4227--4230.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Richard E. Ladner. 2015. Design for user empowerment. interactions 22, 2: 24--29. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Selena Larson. 2016. How Pokemon Go is creating a barrier for gamers with disabilities. The Daily Dot Debug. Retrieved September 11, 2016 from http://www.dailydot.com/debug/pokemon-go-disabilities-problematic/Google Scholar
- Matthew B. Miles and A. M. Huberman. 1994. Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks.Google Scholar
- Harold G Nelson and Erik Stolterman. 2012. The design way: intentional change in an unpredictable world. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Alan Newell, P Gregor, M Morgan, Graham Pullin, and C Macaulay. 2011. User-Sensitive Inclusive Design. Universal Access in the Information Society 10, 3: 235--243. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Alan Newell, P Gregor, M Morgan, Graham Pullin, and C Macaulay. 2011. User-Sensitive Inclusive Design. Universal Access in the Information Society 10, 3: 235--243. Google ScholarDigital Library
- John Potts and John Scannell. 2013. The unacceptable. Palgrave Macmillan, Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire.Google Scholar
- Roland Reznik. Disability Advocates See Opportunity in Self Driving Cars. Smart Chair. Retrieved September 11, 2016 from http://kdsmartchair.com/blogs/news/110637830-disability-advocates-see-opportunity-in-self-driving-carsGoogle Scholar
- Helen Sharp, Yvonne Rogers, and Jenny Preece. 2007. Interaction design: beyond human-computer interaction. Wiley, NJ. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kristen Shinohara, Cynthia L. Bennett, Wanda Pratt, and Jacob O. Wobbrock. 2018. Tenets for Social Accessibility: Towards Humanizing Disabled People in Design. ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing (TACCESS) 11, 1: 1--31. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kristen Shinohara, Cynthia L. Bennett, and Jacob O. Wobbrock. 2016. How Designing for People With and Without Disabilities Shapes Student Design Thinking. In Proc. ASSETS '16., 229--237. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kristen Shinohara and Jacob O. Wobbrock. 2011. In the shadow of misperception: Assistive technology use and social interactions. In Proc. CHI '11, 705--714. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kristen Shinohara and Jacob O. Wobbrock. 2016. Self-Conscious or Self-Confident? A Diary Study Conceptualizing the Social Accessibility of Assistive Technology. ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing (TACCESS) 8, 2: 1--31. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Erik Stolterman. 2008. The Nature of Design Practice and Implications for Interaction Design Research. International Journal of Design 2, 1: 55--65.Google Scholar
- Katherine M. Tsui, Munjal Desai, Holly A. Yanco, and Chris Uhlik. 2011. Exploring use cases for telepresence robots. In Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Human-robot interaction, 11--18. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Chris Urmson. 2015. Green lights for our self-driving vehicle prototypes. Google Blog. Retrieved September 11, 2016 from https://googleblog.blogspot.com/2015/05/self-driving-vehicle-prototypes-on-road.htmlGoogle Scholar
- Jacob O. Wobbrock, Krzysztof Z. Gajos, Shaun K. Kane, and Gregg C. Vanderheiden. 2018. Ability-based design. Communications of the ACM 61, 6: 62--71. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jacob O. Wobbrock, Shaun K. Kane, Krzysztof Z. Gajos, Susumu Harada, and Jon Froehlich. 2011. Ability-based design: Concept, principles, and examples. ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing (TACCESS) 3, 3: 1--27. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Xiao Zhang and Ron Wakkary. 2014. Understanding the role of designers' personal experiences in interaction design practice. In Proc. DIS '14, 895--904. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Incorporating Social Factors in Accessible Design
Recommendations
Design for Social Accessibility Method Cards: Engaging Users and Reflecting on Social Scenarios for Accessible Design
Regular Papers and Special Issue on ASSETS 2018This article is an extended version of our 2018 ASSETS paper entitled, “Incorporating Social Factors in Accessible Design.” In our ASSETS paper, we demonstrated the viability of the Design for Social Accessibility perspective through a series of user-...
Using a Design Workshop To Explore Accessible Ideation
ASSETS '16: Proceedings of the 18th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and AccessibilityAlthough a critical step in the technology design process, ideation is often not accessible for people with disabilities. We present findings from a design workshop facilitated to brainstorm accessible ideation methods. Groups, mostly engineers, ideated ...
Inclusive design advisor: understanding the design practice before developing inclusivity tools
This paper describes an exploratory study investigating ways to accommodate inclusive design techniques and tools within industrial design practices. The approach of our research is that by making only small changes in design features, designers end up ...
Comments