IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/tbitxx/v24y2005i6p419-434.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Empirical validation of the Windows® accessibility settings and multimodal feedback for a menu selection task for users with Diabetic Retinopathy

Author

Listed:
  • J.A. Jacko
  • L. Barnard
  • J.S. Yi
  • P.J. Edwards
  • V.K. Leonard
  • T. Kongnakorn
  • K.P. Moloney
  • F. Sainfort

Abstract

This study investigates the effectiveness of two design interventions, the Microsoft® Windows® accessibility settings and multimodal feedback, aimed at the enhancement of a menu selection task, for users with diabetic retinopathy (DR) with stratified levels of visual dysfunction. Several menu selection task performance measures, both time- and accuracy-based, were explored across different interface conditions and across groups of participants stratified by different degrees of vision loss. The results showed that the Windows® accessibility settings had a significant positive impact on performance for participants with DR. Moreover, multimodal feedback had a negligible effect for all participants. Strategies for applying multimodal feedback to menu selection are discussed, as well as the potential benefits and drawbacks of the Windows® accessibility settings.

Suggested Citation

  • J.A. Jacko & L. Barnard & J.S. Yi & P.J. Edwards & V.K. Leonard & T. Kongnakorn & K.P. Moloney & F. Sainfort, 2005. "Empirical validation of the Windows® accessibility settings and multimodal feedback for a menu selection task for users with Diabetic Retinopathy," Behaviour and Information Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(6), pages 419-434.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:tbitxx:v:24:y:2005:i:6:p:419-434
    DOI: 10.1080/01449290512331335627
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/01449290512331335627
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/01449290512331335627?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:tbitxx:v:24:y:2005:i:6:p:419-434. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/tbit .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.