Personalized Assistive Web for Improving Mobile Web Browsing and Accessibility for Visually Impaired Users

Mobile web browsing has become a daily routine for many people, including those with visual impairments. However, usability and accessibility challenges of mobile handheld devices may compromise the benefits of mobile web access, particularly for users with visual impairments. To improve mobile web accessibility, we propose a Personalized Assistive Web (PAW) that aims to improve skimming in mobile web browsing for users with visual impairments through hierarchical outline view and personalization adaptations in this research. We empirically evaluated PAW via a controlled lab experiment with 21 blind participants and 34 sighted participants. The empirical results provide strong evidence for the positive impacts of the hierarchical outline view adaptation on user performance of information search (i.e., search time) and perceptions (i.e., perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness) across the two groups of participants and demonstrate that the positive effects of adaptation personalization vary with participants. The findings not only demonstrate the effectiveness of the hierarchical outline view adaptation for blind and sighted participants but also reveal some important similarities and interesting differences in the effect of personalized adaptation between the two groups of participants. This research provides design and technical insights that are instrumental for improving mobile web accessibility.

[1]  Barbara Leporini,et al.  Applying Web Usability Criteria for Vision-Impaired Users: Does It Really Improve Task Performance? , 2008, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[2]  Dongsong Zhang,et al.  Can Convenience and Effectiveness Converge in Mobile Web? A Critique of the State-of-the-Art Adaptation Techniques for Web Navigation on Mobile Handheld Devices , 2011, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[3]  S. Seneviratne,et al.  Recent decline in the global land evapotranspiration trend due to limited moisture supply , 2010, Nature.

[4]  C. Weir,et al.  A cognitive processing approach towards defining reading comprehension , 2008 .

[5]  Marianne Huchard,et al.  Reconciling user and designer preferences in adapting web pages for people with low vision , 2015, W4A.

[6]  Jo-Anne LeFevre,et al.  Cognitive load in hypertext reading: A review , 2007, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[7]  Richard E. Ladner,et al.  Usable gestures for blind people: understanding preference and performance , 2011, CHI.

[8]  Iris Vessey,et al.  Cognitive Fit: A Theory‐Based Analysis of the Graphs Versus Tables Literature* , 1991 .

[9]  Youn-Sik Hong,et al.  Pocket News: news contents adaptation for mobile user , 2003, HYPERTEXT '03.

[10]  Yeliz Yesilada,et al.  Experiential transcoding: an EyeTracking approach , 2013, W4A.

[11]  Daniella J. Furman,et al.  Default-Mode and Task-Positive Network Activity in Major Depressive Disorder: Implications for Adaptive and Maladaptive Rumination , 2011, Biological Psychiatry.

[12]  Jun Kong,et al.  A classification of web browsing on mobile devices , 2015, J. Vis. Lang. Comput..

[13]  Richard E. Ladner,et al.  WebinSitu: a comparative analysis of blind and sighted browsing behavior , 2007, Assets '07.

[14]  Andrew Gelman,et al.  P values and statistical practice. , 2013, Epidemiology.

[15]  Jacob O. Wobbrock,et al.  Slide rule: making mobile touch screens accessible to blind people using multi-touch interaction techniques , 2008, Assets '08.

[16]  Stephen A. Brewster,et al.  Haptic Graphs for Blind Computer Users , 2000, Haptic Human-Computer Interaction.

[17]  Robert W. Kerbs,et al.  Content Adaptation for Handheld Mobile Devices , 2013 .

[18]  E. Hollander,et al.  Oxytocin administration attenuates stress reactivity in borderline personality disorder: A pilot study , 2011, Psychoneuroendocrinology.

[19]  Sean Bechhofer,et al.  Identifying Behavioral Strategies of Visually Impaired Users to Improve Access to Web Content , 2011, TACC.

[20]  Bruno Martins,et al.  Hierarchical Soft Clustering and Automatic Text Summarization for Accessing the Web on Mobile Devices for Visually Impaired People , 2009, FLAIRS Conference.

[21]  Guilherme Wood,et al.  Are reaction times obtained during fMRI scanning reliable and valid measures of behavior? , 2013, Experimental Brain Research.

[22]  Richard Chbeir,et al.  Toward Enhancing Web Accessibility for Blind Users through the Semantic Web , 2013, 2013 International Conference on Signal-Image Technology & Internet-Based Systems.

[23]  Simon Harper,et al.  Gist summaries for visually impaired surfers , 2005, Assets '05.

[24]  Eyal de Lara,et al.  Timbremap: enabling the visually-impaired to use maps on touch-enabled devices , 2010, Mobile HCI.

[25]  Chin Kuan Ho,et al.  WEB CONTENT ADAPTATION FOR MOBILE DEVICES: A GREEDY APPROACH , 2011 .

[26]  Bambang Parmanto,et al.  Accessibility Transformation Gateway , 2005, Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[27]  Fred D. Davis.  Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology , 1989, MIS Q..

[28]  I. V. Ramakrishnan,et al.  Accessible skimming: faster screen reading of web pages , 2012, ASSETS '12.

[29]  S. Bergmann,et al.  The evolution of gene expression levels in mammalian organs , 2011, Nature.

[30]  Jaime Teevan,et al.  Implicit feedback for inferring user preference: a bibliography , 2003, SIGF.

[31]  Andrew Dillon,et al.  Towards the design of a full text, searchable database: implications from a study of journal usage , 1988 .

[32]  Namrata Verma,et al.  Find it: information at hand , 2010, Mobile HCI.

[33]  R. Schreuder,et al.  When bicycle pump is harder to read than bicycle bell: effects of parsing cues in first and second language compound reading , 2011, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[34]  Stephen D Goldinger,et al.  Rotation reveals the importance of configural cues in handwritten word perception , 2013, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review.

[35]  Pertti Vakkari,et al.  Task complexity, problem structure and information actions - Integrating studies on information seeking and retrieval , 1999, Inf. Process. Manag..

[36]  Paul Muter,et al.  Reading and skimming from computer screens and books: the paperless office revisited? , 1991 .

[37]  André Pimenta Freire,et al.  Guidelines are only half of the story: accessibility problems encountered by blind users on the web , 2012, CHI.

[38]  Luca Chittaro,et al.  Navigation techniques for small-screen devices: An evaluation on maps and web pages , 2008, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[39]  Rua Alves Redol,et al.  Blind People Interacting with Mobile Social Applications: Open Challenges , 2013 .

[40]  I. V. Ramakrishnan,et al.  More than meets the eye: a survey of screen-reader browsing strategies , 2010, W4A.

[41]  I. V. Ramakrishnan,et al.  Why read if you can skim: towards enabling faster screen reading , 2012, W4A.

[42]  Cheri Speier,et al.  The influence of information presentation formats on complex task decision-making performance , 2006, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[43]  Christopher Olston,et al.  ScentTrails: Integrating browsing and searching on the Web , 2003, TCHI.