Some Reflections on Access Equity - Design and Usability - A General Perspective - The Research Center on Computing & Society

Text-only Version

Charles E. M. Dunlop

Design and Usability – A General Perspective

Dr. Maner’s track address has aptly enumerated a number of areas in which computer access for persons who are disabled has been needlessly restricted. Others could be added. For example, the increasingly popular Graphical User Interfaces may not admit of transparent interpretation to persons with learning disabilities, and these interfaces are substantially incompatible with various current adaptive technologies, e.g. speech synthesis [7: 416]. Furthermore, as Maner observes, designed-in barriers in personal computer systems parallel the thoughtless creation of physical barriers in architecture and transportation. It does seem as though we are replaying an unfortunate history.

But I’m afraid that the analogy between electronic and architectural barriers represents only the tip of a massive iceberg. The type of problem identified by Maner seems almost to be endemic to the process leading from product development to end user. Too often, it appears that products reflect the preconceptions and abilities of those at the producing end, while remaining out of touch with users. For example, a recent article in on the topic of women in computing points out “that, in an experimental setting, teachers instructed to design software for students tended to build programs that have the characteristics that boys prefer, and few characteristics that girls prefer – even when they are aware of these differences” [10: 57, emphasis added] And, to move out of the computer realm for a moment, consider the variety of everyday objects whose usability is severely compromised by thoughtless design. How many of you know how to put a call on “hold” on your office telephone? Did you turn the shower faucets the right way on the first try in your dorm or motel room? Have you recently pushed on a door that required to be pulled in order to open? And, of course, there are abundant stories about microwave ovens and VCRs that are unusable by anyone who is older than a teenager. (For a large and informative catalogue of examples, see [9].)

What is the explanation of this sad state of affairs? A revealing answer is contained in a letter written by a design engineer to the cognitive psychologist, Donald Norman:

Most designers live in a world where the gulf of evaluation is infinite. True, we often know the product too well to envision how people will use it, yet we are separated from the end users by multiple layers of corporate bureaucracy, marketing, customer services, etc. These people believe they know what customers want and feedback from the real world is limited by filters they impose. If you accept the problem definition (product requirements) from these outside sources without personal investigation you will design an inferior product regardless of your best intentions. If this initial hurdle is overcome you are only halfway home. The best design ideas are often ruined by the development-manufacturing process that takes place when they leave the design studio. What this really points out is that the process by which we design is flawed, probably more so than our conception of how to create quality designs. [9: 158]

My purpose here is not to divert attention from the issue of computer access for individuals who are disabled, but to point out that there appears to be a problem that is systemic to product development. Too often, those who create products have little or no expertise in designing for people, and – notably in the design of computer systems – professional designers are seldom brought in to assist [9: 177]. Needed is not only an increased sensitivity on the part of product designers, manufacturers, and marketing people, but also the active involvement and employment of persons with disabilities in the creation and development of those goods. The ubiquity of marginally usable products on the market, however, suggests that this obvious remedy represents a formidable challenge.

Back to the top

Go to: Technology in a Social Context

Home > Research Resources > Adaptive Technology > Equity and Access to Computing Resources > Some Reflections on Access Equity

The Research Center on Computing & Society
at Southern Connecticut State University
501 Crescent Street • New Haven, CT 06515
Director: (203) 392-6790 • e-mail: webmaster@computerethics.org

© 2000 – 2007 – Research Center on Computing & Society