The Expertise Effect on Web Accessibility Evaluation Methods

REFERENCES

• Abou-Zahra , S. 2008 . “ Web accessibility evaluation. ” . In Web accessibility: A foundation for research Edited by: Harper , S. and Yesilada , Y. 79 – 106 . London, , England : Springer. .
   Google Scholar
• Brajnik , G. 2004 . Comparing accessibility evaluation tools: A method for tool effectiveness . International Journal on Universal Access in the Information Society , 3 : 252 – 263 .
   Google Scholar
• Brajnik , G. 2006a . “ Web accessibility testing: When the method is the culprit. ” . In ICCHP 2006, 10th International Conference on Computers Helping People with Special Needs 156 – 163 . Berlin, , Germany : Springer-Verlag. .
   Google Scholar
• Brajnik , G. March 2006b . Web accessibility testing with barriers walkthrough March , Retrieved from http://www.dimi.uniud.it/giorgio/projects/bw/bw.html
   Google Scholar
• Brajnik , G. Beyond conformance: The role of accessibility evaluation methods . WISE 2008: 9th International Conference on Web Information Systems Engineering — 2nd International Workshop on Web Usability and Accessibility IWWUA08 . pp. 63 – 80 . Berlin, , Germany : Springer-Verlag. .
   Google Scholar
• Brajnik , G. Validity and reliability of web accessibility guidelines . Proceedings of the 11th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility — ASSETS 2009 . pp. 131 – 138 . New York, NY : ACM. .
   Google Scholar
• Brajnik , G. , Yesilada , Y. and Harper , S. Testability and validity of WCAG 2.0: The expertise effect . Proceedings of the 12th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility, ASSETS 2010 . pp. 43 – 50 . New York, NY : ACM. . doi: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1878803.1878813
   Google Scholar
• Caldwell , B. , Cooper , M. , Reid , L. G. and Vanderheiden , G. 2008 . Web content accessibility guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 http://www.w3.org/TR
   Google Scholar
• Catani , M. and Biers , D. Usability evaluation and prototype fidelity: Users and usability professionals . Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 42nd Annual Meeting . pp. 1131 – 1336 . Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. .
   Google Scholar
• Coyne , K. P. and Nielsen , J. 2001 . How to conduct usability evaluations for accessibility: Methodology guidelines for testing websites and intranets with users who use assistive technology Fremont, CA : Nielsen Norman Group. . Retrieved from http://www.nngroup.com/reports/accessibility/testing
   Google Scholar
• Disability Rights Commission . April 2004 . Formal investigation report: Web accessibility April , London, , England : Author. . Retrieved from http://www.drc-gb.org/publicationsandreports/report.asp
   Google Scholar
• Gray , W. D. and Salzman , M. C. 1998 . Damaged merchandise: A review of experiments that compare usability evaluation methods . Human–Computer Interaction , 13 : 203 – 261 .
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harper , S. and Yesilada , Y. 2008 . “ Web accessibility and guidelines. ” . In Web accessibility: A foundation for research Edited by: Harper , S. and Yesilada , Y. 61 – 78 . London, , England : Springer. .
   Google Scholar
• Hartson , H. R. , Andre , T. S. and Williges , R. C. 2003 . Criteria for evaluating usability evaluation methods . International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction , 15 : 145 – 181 .
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henry , S. L. and Grossnickle , M. 2004 . Just ask: Accessibility in the user-centered design process Atlanta : Georgia Tech Research Corporation. .
   Google Scholar
• Hertzum , M. and Jacobsen , N. E. 1999 . “ The evaluator effect during first-time use of the cognitive walkthrough technique. ” . In Human-Computer Interaction: Ergonomics and User Interfaces Edited by: Bullinger , H. J. and Ziegler , J. Vol. 1 , 1063 – 1067 . Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. .
   Google Scholar
• Hertzum , M. and Jacobsen , N. E. 2001 . The evaluator effect: A chilling fact about usability evaluation methods . International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction , 1 : 421 – 443 .
   Google Scholar
• Hertzum , M. , Jacobsen , N. E. and Molich , R. 2002 . “ Usability inspections by groups of specialists: Perceived agreement in spite of disparate observations. ” . In CHI 2002 Extended Abstracts 662 – 663 . New York, NY : ACM. .
   Google Scholar
• Hornbæk , K. and Fr⊘kjær , E. 2008 . A study of the evaluator effect in usability testing . Human-Computer Interaction , 23 : 251 – 277 .
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hwang , W. and Salvendy , G. 2010 . Number of people required for usability evaluation: The 10+/−2 rule . Communications of the ACM , 53 : 130 – 133 .
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobsen , N. E. , Hertzum , M. and John , B. The evaluator effect in usability tests . CHI 1998, Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . pp. 255 – 256 . New York, NY : ACM. .
   Google Scholar
• Jay , C. , Lunn , D. and Michailidou , E. 2008 . “ End user evaluations. ” . In Web accessibility: A foundation for research Edited by: Harper , S. and Yesilada , Y. 107 – 126 . London, , England : Springer. .
   Google Scholar
• Lang , T. 2003 . Comparing website accessibility evaluation methods and learnings from usability evaluation methods Retrieved from http://www.peakusability.com.au/about-us/pdf/website_accessibility.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Ling , C. and Salvendy , G. 2009 . Effect of evaluators' cognitive style on heuristic evaluation: Field dependent and field independent evaluators . International Journal of Human-Computer Studies , 67 : 382 – 393 .
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mankoff , J. , Fait , H. and Tran , T. Is your web page accessible? A comparative study of methods for assessing web page accessibility for the blind . CHI 2005, Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . pp. 41 – 50 . New York, NY : ACM. .
   Google Scholar
• Molich , R. , Bevan , N. , Curson , I. , Butler , S. , Kindlund , E. , Miller , D. and Kirakowski , J. Comparative evaluation of usability tests . Proceedings of the Usability Professionals Association Conference . pp. 189 – 200 . Washington, DC : UPA. .
   Google Scholar
• Nielsen , J. Finding usability problems through heuristic evaluation . CHI 1992, Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . pp. 373 – 380 . New York, NY : ACM. .
   Google Scholar
• Nielsen , J. Reliability of severity estimates for usability problems found by heuristic evaluation . CHI 1992: Posters and short talks of the 1992 SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . pp. 129 – 130 . New York, NY : ACM. .
   Google Scholar
• Nielsen , J. 1993 . Usability engineering San Francisco, CA : Morgan Kaufmann. .
   Google Scholar
• Nielsen , J. and Molich , R. Heuristic evaluation of user interfaces . CHI 1990, Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . pp. 249 – 256 . New York, NY : ACM. .
   Google Scholar
• Petrie , H. , Hamilton , F. , King , N. and Pavan , P. Remote usability evaluations with disabled people . CHI 2006, Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems . pp. 1133 – 1141 . New York, NY : ACM. .
   Google Scholar
• Petrie , H. and Kheir , O. 2007 . “ The relationship between accessibility and usability of websites. ” . In Proceedings of CHI 2007 397 – 406 . New York, NY : ACM. .
   Google Scholar
• R Development Core Team . 2010 . R: A language and environment for statistical computing Vienna, , Austria : Author. . Retrieved from http://www.R-project.org
   Google Scholar
• Rubin , J. and Chisnell , D. 2008 . Handbook of usability testing, , 2nd ed. Hoboken, NJ : Wiley. .
   Google Scholar
• Sears , A. 1997 . Heuristic walkthroughs: Finding the problems without the noise . International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction , 9 : 213 – 234 .
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swets , J. A. 1996 . Signal detection theory and ROC analysis in psychology and diagnostics: Collected papers Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. .
   Google Scholar
• Takagi , H. , Kawanaka , S. , Kobayashi , M. , Sato , D. and Asakawa , C. Collaborative web accessibility improvement: Challenges and possibilities . Proceedings of the 11th International ACM SIGACCESS conference on Computers and Accessibility . pp. 195 – 202 . New York, NY : ACM. . doi: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1639642.1639677
   Google Scholar
• Thatcher , J. , Burks , M. , Heilmann , C. , Henry , S. , Kirkpatrick , A. , Lauke , P. , Lawson , B. , Regan , B. , Rutter , R. , Urban , M. and Waddel , C. 2006 . Web accessibility: Web standards and regulatory compliance New York, NY : FriendsofED. .
   Google Scholar
• Trochim , W. M. 2006 . The research methods knowledge base, , 2nd ed. Retrieved from http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/
   Google Scholar
• U. S. Access Board . 2001 . Section 508 standards Retrieved from http://www.section508.gov/
   Google Scholar
• Woolrych , A. , Cockton , G. and Hindmarch , M. 2004 . “ Falsification testing for usability inspection method assessment. ” . In Proceedings of HCI 2004 137 – 140 . London, , England : Springer-Verlag. .
   Google Scholar
• Yesilada , Y. , Brajnik , G. and Harper , S. How much does expertise matter? A Barrier Walkthrough study with experts and non-experts . Proceedings of the 11th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility — ASSETS 2009 . pp. 203 – 210 . New York, NY : ACM. .
   Google Scholar