Annotated Bib

  1. ‘In My Shoes’ Interaction Sandbox for a Quest of Accessible Design: Teaching Sighted Students Accessible Design for Blind People by Cosima Rughiniș
  2. Dr. Cosima Rughiniș is a professor at the University of Bucharest, where she teaches courses in sociological research methodology. She has been published 63 times, has 204 citations, and 20,734 reads according to as linked in her website.  
  3. This paper explains how sighted students can design for blind or visually impaired users as well as how teachers can educate their students to design with empathy to have accessible design. The researchers introduce the “In My Shoes’ Interaction Sandbox” which is an interactable online resource to act as a guide for sighted students to design for the blind by “imagining and making sense of interactions with blind people” (Rughiniș, 65). The paper continues by explaining the “Web of Arguments” or reasons why this information is relevant for everyone. The paper explains the ethical and social responsibility of design, as well as the fact that blind and visually impaired persons make up a large population of users as users age and their vision diminishes. The paper then continues to explain in more detail the “In My Shoes’ Interaction Sandbox” while also introducing an Interactional Malaise for the student to understand and empathize with a blind person’s anxiety, frustration, and confusion while navigating a world that was designed for them. The Interaction Sandbox is a tool for these students to understand the “mechanics of discomfort” and how they can conceptualize their way out. The authors also propose accessible design as a quest. This idea of design as a quest leads students to see themselves as heroes and to value fact that they have the ability to inspire and help the lives of others, in this case, blind persons. With this idea of a quest, others worry that this is going to romanticize blindness. The researchers argue against this for “productive misunderstanding, to the extent that it upholds a stronger commitment to accessible design” 
  4. Cosima Rughiniș. “‘In My Shoes’ Interaction Sandbox for a Quest of Accessible Design: Teaching Sighted Students Accessible Design for Blind People” Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction. Design and Development Methods for Universal Access, vol. 5, 2014, Accessed 15 Feb 2021.
  1. Universal design, inclusive design, accessible design, design for all: different concepts—one goal? On the concept of accessibility—historical, methodological and philosophical aspects by Hans Perrson 
  2. Hans Persson is a professor at KTH Royal Institute of Technology in Stockholm, Sweden who has been publishing since 2009 until 2015. Her has an average of 483 downloads per article. His other articles on design, accessibility, and universal access have also been peer reviewed by other professors and researchers.
  3. This paper discusses the need and benefits of universal design including individual, business, societal, and economic benefits. The paper discusses the lack of consensus regarding accessibility in different areas, including within the ISO (International Organization for Standardization) and how this has hindered the quality of accessible design. The paper also cites the European Institute for Design and Disability (EIDD) in the Stockholm Declaration as it explains that the term “Design for all, is design for human diversity, social inclusion, and equality.” The article closes with the problem with the lack of consensus on the idea of accessibility. The authors show the consequences of not definition, to many definitions, to a single definition. With no definition of accessibility, the problem is that there is now legal boundaries for when something is or is not accessible that could lead to discrimination. Many definitions could lead to misunderstandings, legal confusion, and the consumer will still not know if the product will meet their needs. A single definition of accessibility would make it easy for consumers to know if their needs will be met, however will run into challenges of being too broad. The authors propose that the definition of accessibility should focus on flexibility and  adaptability to meet the “ever changing gaps” of a person’s ability. 
  4. Persson, Hans, et al. “Universal Design, Inclusive Design, Accessible Design, Design for all: Different Concepts–One Goal? on the Concept of Accessibility–Historical, Methodological and Philosophical Aspects.” Universal Access in the Information Society, vol. 14, no. 4, 2015, pp. 505-526. ProQuest,,doi: Accessed 15 Feb. 2021
  1. Design for Social Accessibility Method Cards: Engaging Users and Reflecting on Social Scenarios for Accessible Design by Kristen Shinohara 
  2. Kristen Shinohara is an Assistant Professor in the School of Information at the Rochester Institute of Technology where she also developed Design for Social Accessibility (DSA) perspective where designers engage in a design process that meets the needs of disabled viewers. This article was peer reviewed and was supported in part by the National Science Foundation. 
  3. In this paper, the authors open with discussing what is inclusive design and what is user-centered design. User-centered design has the designers partake in “user-centered”  activities to understand the needs, desires, and experience of the user. Inclusive design is design that can be used by a wide, diverse audience. The article continues with touching on agility-based design which focuses on what disabled people can do rather than cannot. The researchers had 2 intro courses in part of their research along with a workshop and a Master’s class as the final class. The first class  taught how to design for disabled and nondisabled stakeholders and the social institutions that have formed this way of thinking. The second class built upon what was taught in the previous class and also brought in experts in the field. The researchers developed Method Cards that bring up the experiences of disabled persons and enforces the participants to reflect on social considerations in a human-centric style. The cards will prompt the students with different scenarios, such as an awkward moment with someone who uses technology for their disability, and gives them questions to spark their brainstorming to combat these issues. The students then move onto prototyping and testing. The students were interviewed at the end of the course and workshops on their opinions and usefulness of the cards. Most students says that the DSA cards were a very helpful tool in retraining how they design in an inclusive way. 
  4. Kristen Shinohara et al. “Design for Social Accessibility Method Cards: Engaging Users and Reflecting on Social Scenarios for Accessible Design,” ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing, no. 17,
  5. doi/epdf/10.1145/3369903 Accessed 15 Feb 2021.  
  1. Quality in Web Design for Visually Impaired Users by Margaret Ross 
  2. Margaret Roth is a highly respected professor at Southampton Solent University under the School of Media Arts and Technology. She has 93 publications discussing topics like ethical design and software. She serves on the BCSWomen Committee of the British Computer Society. She has a lot of awards to her name including MBE awarded at Buckingham Palace for Services to higher education
  3. The article starts out by explaining that web design is not always accessible to people with visual impairments or blindness. Margaret Ross mentions that with an aging population, designers and software designers should be focusing on inclusive design to meet the needs of the people. One of the problems that Ross brings up is colors that are indistinguishable to colorblind persons. The article says to avoid red/green and blue/yellow color combinations for many people have a hard time differentiating those colors. The paper continues by explaining the Bobby test. The bobby test is a free website that will scan your website and give it a score on whether it is accessible for handicapped viewers. The study showed their results with surveying 17 websites including Safeway, Tesco, HSBC, and Abbey National. They ranked these sites among the categories legibility, Alternative text (for pictures), Alternative frames, sensible links, and if it passes the bobby test. The researchers scored the sites using the rubric with either a P for pass or F for fail. 60% of the sites passed in legibility, bad sadly those numbers get lower and lower across the board with all but one website failing the bobby test. 
  4. Ross, M. Quality in Web Design for Visually Impaired Users. Software Quality Journal 10, 285–298 (2002). Accessed 16 Feb 2021
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *