Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

The Simulated User Impairment Testing (SUIT) Protocol and Toolbox for Digital Artifacts

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction. Novel Design Approaches and Technologies (HCII 2022)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 13308))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 1388 Accesses

Abstract

User testing involving people with varying abilities and impairments are two of the key ingredients of universal design that can help to increase the accessibility and usability of an ICT artifact. However, recruiting adequate participants during the design and development process can be difficult, time-consuming and resource intensive. We suggest mitigating these challenges by employing user simulation as additional quality assessment measure throughout the design and development process of a digital ICT artifact.

In the present paper, we present a protocol and a toolbox for Simulated User Impairment Testing (SUIT) that enables non-impaired designers and developers to simulate the perception of people with some of the most common impairments related to cognitive, visual, auditory, vocal, mobility-related and motor-related functioning. We compile a list of possible tools and methods that are readily available or easily obtainable in a production and design setting. Moreover, we complement this list with relevant user examples for each category, as well as examples of the most common barriers. Finally, we point out how the Simulated User Impairment Testing (SUIT) toolbox can be used to add an additional layer of quality assessment during the design and development process of a digital artifact and argue that it cannot replace the user testing part.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bai, A., Fuglerud, K.S., Skjerve, R.A., Halbach, T.: Categorization and comparison of accessibility testing methods for software development. Stud. Health Technol. Inform. 256, 821–831 (2018). https://europepmc.org/article/med/30371447

  2. Bai, A., Mork, H.C., Stray, V.: A cost-benefit evaluation of accessibility testing in agile software development. ICSEA 2016, 75 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bai, A., Skjerve, R., Halbach, T., Fuglerud, K.: Evaluating accessibility testing in automated software build processes. In: Norsk IKT-konferanse for forskning og utdanning, November 2019. https://ojs.bibsys.no/index.php/NIK/article/view/646

  4. Begnum, M.E.N.: Universal design of ICT: a historical journey from specialized adaptations towards designing for diversity. In: Antona, M., Stephanidis, C. (eds.) HCII 2020. LNCS, vol. 12188, pp. 3–18. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-49282-3_1

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Bonacin, R., Dos Reis, J.C., Baranauskas, M.C.C.: Universal participatory design: achievements and challenges. SBC J. Interact. Syst. 10(1), 2–16 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Clerk Center, Gallaudet University: Assistive Technology (2017). https://clerccenter.gallaudet.edu/national-resources/info/info-to-go/assistive-technology.html. Accessed 24 Feb 2022

  7. Cooper, A.: The inmates are running the asylum. In: Software-Ergonomie 1999. Springer, Cham (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-322-99786-9_1

  8. European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI): EN 301 549 v3.1.1 (2019–06): Accessibility requirements for ICT products and services, June 2019

    Google Scholar 

  9. European Union (EU): Web Accessibility Directive (WAD) - Directive (EU) 2016/2102, October 2016. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2016/2102/oj. Accessed 23 Feb 2021

  10. Funkfiy: Funkify (2022). https://www.funkify.org/. Accessed 24 Feb 2022

  11. Giannoumis, G.A.: Implementing web accessibility policy. Case studies of the United Kingdom, Norway, and the United States. Ph.D. thesis, The University of Bergen, June 2019. http://hdl.handle.net/1956/21054

  12. Halbach, T., Simon-Liedtke, J.T.: Categories of user impairment. In: IADIS International Conference on Interfaces and Human Computer Interaction 2021 (part of MCCSIS 2021) (2021). https://nr.brage.unit.no/nr-xmlui/handle/11250/2766973

  13. Halbach, T., Tjøstheim, I.: Towards reliable accessibility assessments of science center exhibits. In: Lamas, D., Loizides, F., Nacke, L., Petrie, H., Winckler, M., Zaphiris, P. (eds.) INTERACT 2019. LNCS, vol. 11746, pp. 33–41. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-29381-9_3

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Hørselshemmedes Landsforbund (HLF): Om HLF (2022). https://www.hlf.no/kontakt-oss/om-hlf/. Accessed 24 Feb 2022

  15. Kommunal-og moderniseringsdepartementet: Forskrift om universell utforming av informasjons-og kommunikasjonsteknologiske (ikt)-løsninger (for-2013-06-21-732), June 2013. https://lovdata.no/dokument/SF/forskrift/2013-06-21-732. Accessed 17 Sept 2020

  16. Kulturdepartementet: Lov om likestilling og forbud mot diskriminering (likestillings-og diskrimineringsloven, lov-2017-06-16-51), June 2017. https://lovdata.no/dokument/NL/lov/2017-06-16-51. Accessed 17 Sept 2020

  17. Leventhal, A.: NoCoffee - Vision simulator for chrome, February 2013. https://accessgarage.wordpress.com/2013/02/09/458/. Accessed 24 Feb 2022

  18. Malt, E.A., et al.: Health and disease in adults with Down syndrome. Tidsskrift for Den norske legeforening, February 2013. https://doi.org/10.4045/tidsskr.12.0390, https://tidsskriftet.no/en/2013/02/health-and-disease-adults-down-syndrome

  19. McFadden, E., Hager, D.R., Elie, C.J., Blackwell, J.M.: Remote usability evaluation: overview and case studies. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 14(3–4), 489–502 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2002.9669131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Metamatrix: Web Disability Simulator - Chrome Nettmarked (2019). https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/web-disability-simulator/olioanlbgbpmdlgjnnampnnlohigkjla. Accessed 24 Feb 2022

  21. Miljøverndepartementet: T-1468 B/E Universell utforming, November 2007. https://www.regjeringen.no/no/dokumenter/t-1468-universell-utforming/id493083/

  22. National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD): Assistive Devices for People with Hearing, Voice, Speech, or Language Disorders, November 2019. https://www.nidcd.nih.gov/health/assistive-devices-people-hearing-voice-speech-or-language-disorders. Accessed 9 Nov 2020

  23. Norges Blindeforbund: Skjermleser, March 2021. https://www.blindeforbundet.no/hjelpemidler-og-produkter/skjermleser. Accessed 24 Feb 2022

  24. Petrie, H., Bevan, N.: The evaluation of accessibility, usability, and user experience. In: The Universal Access Handbook, vol. 1, pp. 1–16 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Power, C., Petrie, H.: Working with participants. In: Yesilada, Y., Harper, S. (eds.) Web Accessibility. HIS, pp. 153–168. Springer, London (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-7440-0_9

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  26. Pruitt, J., Grudin, J.: Personas: practice and theory. In: Proceedings of the 2003 Conference on Designing for User Experiences, DUX 2003, San Francisco, California, pp. 1–15. Association for Computing Machinery, June 2003. https://doi.org/10.1145/997078.997089

  27. Q42: SEE, June 2014. https://github.com/Q42/SEE. Accessed 24 Feb 2022

  28. Sauer, J., Sonderegger, A., Schmutz, S.: Usability, user experience and accessibility: towards an integrative model. Ergonomics 63(10), 1207–1220 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2020.1774080

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Schmutz, S., Sonderegger, A., Sauer, J.: Implementing recommendations from web accessibility guidelines: would they also provide benefits to nondisabled users. Hum. Factors 58(4), 611–629 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720816640962

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Schmutz, S., Sonderegger, A., Sauer, J.: Effects of accessible website design on nondisabled users: age and device as moderating factors. Ergonomics 61(5), 697–709 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2017.1405080

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Statlig spesialpedagogisk tjeneste (Statped): Skjermleserne TalkBack og Voice Assistant for Android (2019). https://www.statped.no/laringsressurser/syn/opplaring-i-mobil-og-nettbrett/android-for-synshemmede/skjermleserne-talkback-og-voice-assistent-for-android/. Accessed 24 Feb 2022

  32. Story, M.F., Mueller, J.L., Mace, R.L.: The Universal Design File: Designing for People of All Ages and Abilities, Revised Edition. Center for Universal Design, NC State University, Raleigh (1998). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED460554

  33. Stray, V., Bai, A., Sverdrup, N., Mork, H.: Empowering Agile project members with accessibility testing tools: a case study. In: Kruchten, P., Fraser, S., Coallier, F. (eds.) XP 2019. LNBIP, vol. 355, pp. 86–101. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19034-7_6

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  34. The A11Y Project (2021). https://a11yproject.com/. Accesed 24 Feb 2022

  35. The US Census Bureau: Americans with Disabilities: 2010, July 2012. https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2012/demo/p70-131.html

  36. The US Census Bureau: Americans with Disabilities: 2014, November 2018. https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2018/demo/p70-152.html

  37. United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR): Disability: Prevalence and Impact - Syrian Arab Republic. Humanitarian Needs Assessment Programme (HNAP), September 2019. A Nationwide Household Survey Using Washington Group Methodology

    Google Scholar 

  38. United Nations (UN): Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities (CRPD) (2006). https://www.un.org/development/desa/disabilities/convention-on-the-rights-of-persons-with-disabilities.html

  39. University of Cambridge: Cambridge Simulation Glasses (2017). http://www.inclusivedesigntoolkit.com/csg/csg.html. Accessed 24 Feb 2022

  40. W3C Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI): Diverse Abilities and Barriers, October 2020. https://www.w3.org/WAI/people-use-web/abilities-barriers/. Accessed 15 Oct 2020

  41. World Health Organization (WHO): International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF), May 2001. https://www.who.int/classifications/icf/en/. Accessed 10 Nov 2020

  42. World Wide Web Consortium (W3C): Web content accessibility guidelines (WCAG) 2.0, December 2008. https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/. Accessed 17 Sept 2020

  43. World Wide Web Consortium (W3C): Web content accessibility guidelines (WCAG) 2.1, June 2018. https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/. Accessed 17 Sept 2020

  44. World Wide Web Consortium (W3C): Web content accessibility guidelines (WCAG) 2.2 [working draft], August 2020. https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG22/. Accessed 17 Sept 2020

Download references

Acknowledgement

This work was partly supported by the UnIKT program of the Norwegian Directorate for Children, Youth and Family Affairs.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Norwegian Computing Center, Gaustadalléen 23A, 0373, Oslo, Norway

    Joschua Thomas Simon-Liedtke & Till Halbach

Authors
  1. Joschua Thomas Simon-Liedtke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Till Halbach
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joschua Thomas Simon-Liedtke .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Foundation for Research and Technology - Hellas (FORTH), Heraklion, Crete, Greece

    Margherita Antona

  2. University of Crete and Foundation for Research and Technology - Hellas (FORTH), Heraklion, Crete, Greece

    Constantine Stephanidis

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Simon-Liedtke, J.T., Halbach, T. (2022). The Simulated User Impairment Testing (SUIT) Protocol and Toolbox for Digital Artifacts. In: Antona, M., Stephanidis, C. (eds) Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction. Novel Design Approaches and Technologies. HCII 2022. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 13308. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-05028-2_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-05028-2_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-05027-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-05028-2

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics