Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluating a modified Google user interface via screen reader

  • Long Paper
  • Published:
Universal Access in the Information Society Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper describes the progress of a research project aimed at improving the usability of web search tools for blind users who interact via screen readers and voice synthesizers. In the first stage of research, specific guidelines were proposed for simplifying the interaction with search engines for the blind. To evaluate these criteria, they were applied to Google user interfaces, by re-implementing the search form as well as the results page. Finally, the redesigned interfaces were evaluated through remote testing with 12 totally blind users. The results highlighted how Google, although already accessible, may be further improved in order to simplify interaction for people with impaired vision.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Blindness is defined as visual acuity of less than 3/60, or corresponding visual field loss to less than 10 degrees, in the better eye with best possible correction.

  2. W3C Working Draft version 2.0 is available at http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/.

  3. From December 2006 Google no longer issued new SOAP Search APIs suggesting programmers to use instead AJAX Search APIs (http://code.google.com/apis/ajaxsearch/). However, developers with existing SOAP Search API keys are not affected by this choice.

  4. For details concerning the implementation of the modified interfaces and examples, the reader may refer to Andronico et al. [2] .

  5. Parla is an Italian screen reader developed in the 1980s by CNR. This screen reader works with applications in Dos Operating System.

  6. He/she did not use access keys or Jaws special commands for exploration, but only the basic Jaws command such as arrow and tab keys.

References

  1. Andronico, P., Buzzi, M., Leporini, B.: Increasing usability of search engine interfaces for the blind. In: Proceedings of HCI International 2005, Las Vegas, July 2005, Lea (2005)

  2. Andronico, P., Buzzi, M., Castillo, C., Leporini B.: Improving search engine interfaces for blind users: a case study. Int. J. Univers. Access Inf. Soc. 2006 Springer (2006)

  3. Card, S.K., Moran, A., Newell, T.P.: The psychology of human-computer interaction. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc, New Jersey (1983)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Carroll John M.: Scenario-based design. Wiley, USA (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Craven, J., Brophy, P.: Non-visual access to the digital library: the use of digital library interfaces by blind and visually impaired people. Technical report, Manchester: Centre for Research in Library and Information Management, CERLIM. (http://www.cerlim.ac.uk/pubs/index.php) (2003)

  6. Damery E.: Jaws for Windows version 4.51. New features and accessing the Internet. In: Proceedings of CSUN 2003, Los Angeles, (2003)

  7. Goble C., Harper S., Stevens R.: The Travails of Visually impaired Web Travellers. In: Proceedings of Hypertext 2000, San Antonio, June 2000, ACM, 1–10 (2000)

  8. Google.: Google Search API. http://code.google.com/apis/soapsearch/ (2006)

  9. Google.: Accessible Search FAQ, http://labs.google.com/accessible/faq.html (2007)

  10. Hanson, V.L.: A Web accessibility service: an update and findings. In: Proceedings of the Sixth International ACM Conference on Assistive Technologies, ASSETS 2004, pp. 169–176 (2004)

  11. Hanson, V.L., Brezin, J.P., Crayne, S., Keates, S., Kjeldsen, R., Richards, J.T., Swart, C., Trewin, S.: Improving Web accessibility through an enhanced open-source browser. IBM Syst. J. 44(3), 573–588 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Hartson, H.R., Castillo, J.C., Kelso, J, Neale, W.C.: Remote evaluation: the network as an extension of the usability laboratory. In: Proceedings of CHI 1996, Vancouver, April 1996, ACM, 228–235 (1996)

  13. Hartson, H.R., Castillo, J.C.: Remote evaluation for post-deployment usability improvement. In: Proceedings of CHI 98, Los Angeles, April 1998, ACM, pp. 22–29 (1998)

  14. ISO 9241-11, 1998. Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals (VDTs), Part 11: Guidance on Usability, 1st edn., 1998-03-15, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva (1998)

  15. istat, Disabilità in cifre, Quante sono le persone con disabilità in Italia? http://www.disabilitaincifre.it/index.asp 2004–2005 (in italian)

  16. Ivory, M.Y., Yu, S., Gronemyer, K.: Search result exploration: a preliminary study of blind and sighted users’ decision making and performance. In: Proceedings of Extended abstracts of CHI 2004, Vienna, April 2004, ACM, 1453–1456 (2004)

  17. Ivory, M.Y., Hearst, M.A.: The state of the art in automating usability evaluation of user interfaces. Computing Surveys, vol. 2001, N.4, December 2004, ACM, 470–516 (2004)

  18. Leporini, B., Andronico P., Buzzi, m.: Designing search engine user interfaces for the visually impaired. In: Proceedings of International Cross-Disciplinary Workshop on Web Accessibility, NY, May 2004, ACM, pp. 57–66 (2004)

  19. Leporini, B., Paternò, F.: Increasing usability when interacting through screen readers. Springer Int J Univers Access Inf Soc (UAIS) vol. 3, Number 1, Special Issue on “Guidelines, standards, methods and processes for software accessibility”, pp. 57–70 (2004)

  20. Mankoff J., Fait H., Tran T.: Is your Web page accessible? A comparative study of methods for assessing Web page accessibility for the blind. In: Proceedings of CHI2005, Portland, April 2005, 899–908 (2005)

  21. Nielsen, J.: Alertbox January 21, 2001. Usability Metrics. Available at http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20010121.html. (2001)

  22. Nielsen, J.: Alertbox May 9, 2005. Mental models for search are getting firmer. http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20050509.html. (2005)

  23. Norman, K.L., Panizzi, E.: Levels of automation and user participation in usability testing. Interact. Comput. 18(2) pp. 246–264 March, 2006, Elsevier, (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Petrie, H, Hamilton, F., King, N., Pavan, P. Remote usability evaluations with disabled people. In: Proceedings of CHI 2006, Montréal, Canada, April 22–27, 2006, pp. 1133–1141 (2006)

  25. Scholtz, J.: Adaptation of traditional usability testing methods for remote testing. In: Proceedings of HICSS 2001, Hawaii, January 2001, IEEE 1–9 (2001)

  26. Raman, T.V.: Overview of accessible solutions from Google, http://labs.google.com/accessible/overview.html (2007)

  27. Takagi, H., Asakawa, C., Fukuda, K., Maeda, J.: Accessibility designer: visualizing usability for the blind. In: Proceedings of SIGACCESS 2004, Atlanta, October 2004, ACM, pp. 177–184 (2004)

  28. Thompson, K.E., Rozanski, E.P., Haake, A.R.: Here, there, anywhere: remote usability testing that works. In: Proceedings of SIGITE 2004, Salt Lake City, October 2004, pp. 132–137 (2004)

  29. WHO. Magnitude and causes of visual impairment. Fact Sheet N°282, November 2004, http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs282/en/

  30. W3C. Web content accessibility guidelines 1.0. http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10/, 5 May 1999

  31. W3C. SOAP Version 1.2 Part 0: Primer. W3C Recommendation 24 June 2003. http://www.w3.org/TR/soap12-part0/

  32. W3C. XSL Transformations (XSLT). http://www.w3.org/TR/xslt, 16 Nov 1999

  33. Yu, W., McAllister, G., Kuber, R., Murphy, E., Strain, P.: Improving Web accessibility using content-aware plug-ins. In: Extended Abstracts of CHI’05, Portland, USA, pp. 1893–1896 (2005)

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank all the participants in our user testing who made an enthusiastic effort to help us in our research, and the reviewers of this paper for their very useful comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CNR-ISTI, via Moruzzi 1, 56124, Pisa, Italy

    Barbara Leporini

  2. CNR-IIT, via Moruzzi 1, 56124, Pisa, Italy

    Patrizia Andronico & Marina Buzzi

  3. Università la Sapienza Roma, Rome, Italy

    Carlos Castillo

Authors
  1. Barbara Leporini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Patrizia Andronico
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Marina Buzzi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Carlos Castillo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Barbara Leporini.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Leporini, B., Andronico, P., Buzzi, M. et al. Evaluating a modified Google user interface via screen reader. Univ Access Inf Soc 7, 155–175 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-007-0111-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-007-0111-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation