Summary
Did you know that the SUS creates biases in your research, affecting one in five people? That’s right! People with disabilities, especially those who use assistive technology, are not considered by most of the questions in the SUS. As a designer, this could lead to you making design decisions that don’t take into account 20 percent of the visitors to your website. When the SUS was invented, the author encouraged people to change it to suit different needs. In this talk, Samuel Proulx from Fable will discuss how Fable adapted the SUS to work for assistive technology users. Drawing from over five thousand hours of research and testing involving assistive technology users, we created the Accessible Usability Scale (AUS). This presentation will include trends in AUS responses since it was released in December of 2020.
Key Insights
-
•
Screen readers require highly structured and semantically correct web content to enable efficient navigation for blind users.
-
•
Screen reader users often customize speed and voice settings to consume information at 400-800 words per minute, much faster than typical speech.
-
•
Alternative navigation devices, such as head mice and switch systems, rely on precise physical control and can be hindered by environmental factors like vibrations.
-
•
Current think-aloud usability testing methods create cognitive overload for assistive technology users, as they must manage device output, researcher communication, and narration simultaneously.
-
•
Travel and physical accessibility barriers severely limit the participation of people with disabilities in traditional usability labs.
-
•
Assistive technologies are highly personalized, so standard lab setups often fail to support users’ customized configurations, reducing test validity.
-
•
Standard System Usability Scale (SUS) questions inadequately capture the unique needs and experiences of assistive technology users.
-
•
Fable’s Accessible Usability Scale (AUS) adapts SUS questions to reflect assistive technology usage, improving relevance and accuracy.
-
•
Preliminary AUS results show screen reader users rate usability lower than magnification users, reflecting the greater complexity and demands of screen reader use.
-
•
Inclusive research requires adapting methods to account for varied assistive technologies, emphasizing flexibility and one-size-does-not-fit-all approaches.
Notable Quotes
"What screen readers allow us to do is to jump directly to bits of content that we are interested in to replicate the visual experience of skimming a web page."
"Most screen reader users prefer robotic voices so they can speed up the speech and read much faster than typical people."
"Alternative navigation includes things like switch systems, voice dictation, and head mice to replace standard keyboard and mouse."
"Traveling to a research lab can take longer than the research session itself for people with physical disabilities due to specialty transit."
"Every piece of assistive technology is highly customized for the individual, so labs often fail to replicate users’ ideal setups."
"The standard SUS question about needing a technical person to use the system is frustrating because many assistive tech users are very technical themselves."
"The question who are most people is confusing when applied to assistive technology users in usability scales."
"John Rucklin said if your questionnaire isn’t relevant, you can devise your own — and that’s what we did with the Accessible Usability Scale."
"Screen reader users scored in the low to mid 50s on our scale while magnification users scored around 70 and alternative navigation users around 60."
"Inclusive design is about one size fits one, not one size fits all, especially in research methodologies."
Or choose a question:
More Videos
"Trust was so key to the product-UX relationship and it was further built by putting structure in place."
Noreen Whysel Katie SaindonShort Take #4: UX/Product Lessons from Your Industry Peers
December 6, 2022
"Every small initiative can lead to significant change when multiplied across communities."
Ash BrownSilver Linings: What DesignOps Learned in the Shift to WFH
October 23, 2020
"We collaborate and iteratively build out these presentations as part of a continuing conversation."
Uday GajendarTheme 1: Introduction
June 9, 2021
"Badly designed personas create stereotypes, not archetypes."
Cassini Nazir Meah LinThe Dangers of Empathy: Toward More Responsible Design Research
March 27, 2023
"Packaging research with simple headlines brings people in, then we can layer on nuance and detail."
Gregg BernsteinOpportunistic Research with Gregg Bernstein
July 11, 2019
"Steve Bennett asked, what’s beyond ease, leading us to study companies known for delighting their customers."
Kaaren HansonStop Talking, Start Doing
June 9, 2017
"If we can’t provide research as a service at scale, we need to make sure the teams are equipped to do it on their own."
Erin May Roberta Dombrowski Laura Oxenfeld Brooke HintonDistributed, Democratized, Decentralized: Finding a Research Model to Support Your Org
March 10, 2022
"I wish I had had a better understanding of how many non-UX people know so little about UX practices."
Brad Peters Anne MamaghaniShort Take #1: UX/Product Lessons from Your Industry Peers
December 6, 2022
"Multitasking is a myth. You can’t listen and do emails at the same time effectively."
Tutti TaygerlyVideconference: How to Work with Difficult People with Tutti Taygerly
June 25, 2020
Latest Books All books
Dig deeper with the Rosenbot
What strategies did Sean and Sarah use to create a shared language and structure for managing government design knowledge?
What is the purpose of Leadership Dichotomies and how can leaders use it for self-awareness?
How can teams effectively collaborate between different ops functions across departments to improve communication?