Context: In recent years, many usability evaluation methods (UEMs) have been employed to evaluate Web applications. However, many of these applications still do not meet most customers' usability expectations and many companies have folded as a result of not considering Web usability issues. No studies currently exist with regard to either the use of usability evaluation methods for the Web or the benefits they bring. Objective: The objective of this paper is to summarize the current knowledge that is available as regards the usability evaluation methods (UEMs) that have been employed to evaluate Web applications over the last 14years. Method: A systematic mapping study was performed to assess the UEMs that have been used by researchers to evaluate Web applications and their relation to the Web development process. Systematic mapping studies are useful for categorizing and summarizing the existing information concerning a research question in an unbiased manner. Results: The results show that around 39% of the papers reviewed reported the use of evaluation methods that had been specifically crafted for the Web. The results also show that the type of method most widely used was that of User Testing. The results identify several research gaps, such as the fact that around 90% of the studies applied evaluations during the implementation phase of the Web application development, which is the most costly phase in which to perform changes. A list of the UEMs that were found is also provided in order to guide novice usability practitioners. Conclusions: From an initial set of 2703 papers, a total of 206 research papers were selected for the mapping study. The results obtained allowed us to reach conclusions concerning the state-of-the-art of UEMs for evaluating Web applications. This allowed us to identify several research gaps, which subsequently provided us with a framework in which new research activities can be more appropriately positioned, and from which useful information for novice usability practitioners can be extracted.

Usability evaluation methods for the web: A systematic mapping study

In previous research, the computer frustrations of student and workplace users have been documented. However, the challenges faced by blind users on the Web have not been previously examined. In this study, 100 blind users, using time diaries, recorded their frustrations using the Web. The top causes of frustration reported were (a) page layout causing confusing screen reader feedback; (b) conflict between screen reader and application; (c) poorly designed/unlabeled forms; (d) no alt text for pictures; and (e) 3-way tie between misleading links, inaccessible PDF, and a screen reader crash. Most of the causes of frustration, such as inappropriate form and graphic labels and confusing page layout, are relatively simple to solve if Webmasters and Web designers focus on this effort. In addition, the more technically challenging frustrations, such as screen reader crashes and conflicts, need to be addressed by the screen reader developers. Blind users in this study were likely to repeatedly attempt to...

What Frustrates Screen Reader Users on the Web: A Study of 100 Blind Users

Improving web accessibility: a study of webmaster perceptions

Web access for users with disabilities is an important goal and challenging problem for web content developers and designers. This paper presents a comparison of different methods for finding accessibility problems affecting users who are blind. Our comparison focuses on techniques that might be of use to Web developers without accessibility experience, a large and important group that represents a major source of inaccessible pages. We compare a laboratory study with blind users to an automated tool, expert review by web designers with and without a screen reader, and remote testing by blind users. Multiple developers, using a screen reader, were most consistently successful at finding most classes of problems, and tended to find about 50% of known problems. Surprisingly, a remote study with blind users was one of the least effective methods. All of the techniques, however, had different, complementary strengths and weaknesses.

/pdf/is-your-web-page-accessible-a-comparative-study-of-methods-1m5fc173f7.pdf

Is your web page accessible?: a comparative study of methods for assessing web page accessibility for the blind

This paper claims that effectiveness of automatic tools for evaluating web site accessibility has to be itself evaluated, given the increasingly important role that these tools play. The paper presents a comparison method for a pair of tools that takes into account correctness, completeness and specificity in supporting the task of assessing the conformance of a web site with respect to established guidelines. The paper presents data acquired during a case study based on comparing LIFT Machine with Bobby. The data acquired from the case study is used to assess the strengths and weaknesses of the comparison method. The conclusion is that even though there is room for improvement of the method, it is already capable of providing accurate and reliable conclusions.

Comparing accessibility evaluation tools: a method for tool effectiveness

Content accessibility is a key feature in highly usable Web sites, but reports in the popular press typically report that 95% or more of all Web sites are inaccessible to users with disabilities. The present study is a content accessibility compliance audit of 50 of the Web's most popular sites, undertaken to determine if content accessibility can be conceived and reported in continuous, rather than dichotomous, terms. Preliminary results suggest that a meaningful ordinal ranking of content accessibility is not only possible, but also correlates significantly with the results of independent automated usability assessment procedures.

Barriers to use: usability and content accessibility on the Web's most popular sites

Distance methods of supervision rapidly increased in use during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, and it is important to consider if these methods meet the needs of supervisees when deciding whether to retain these practices moving forward. An interpretative phenomenological approach was used to gain insight into the lived experience of distance supervision. Semi-structured interviews were completed with six occupational therapists who had experience receiving distance supervision as a supervisee, all of whom work in inpatient mental health units within a private healthcare company. Interpretative phenomenological analysis revealed four superordinate themes of an altered interaction; the importance of a protected space; factors within the supervisory relationship and maximising the best of both worlds. Distance supervision methods afford increased access for supervisees and a reduction in the practical demands when supervised by an off-site supervisor. There are, however, clear differences in the nature of the experience which need to be considered to ensure that supervisee needs are met. This study provides insight into how distance supervision methods impact on the experience for supervisees and suggests areas for further consideration in moving forward with such approaches.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/03080226231174102

Rebecca Matson

Papers

Barriers to use: usability and content accessibility on the Web's most popular sites

Distance supervision as experienced by occupational therapists in mental health: An interpretative phenomenological study

Exploring student confidence within case-based learning: An action research study