Full Paper Accepted at ASSETS 2009 PittsburghPublished: Wednesday, 22 July 2009
[image src="http://184.108.40.206/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/assets2009-logo.png" alt="" class="right"] The researchers from the HCW lab had a full technical paper accepted at ASSETS 2009.[image src="http://220.127.116.11/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/assets2009-logo.png" alt="" class="right"]
The researchers from the HCW lab had a full technical paper accepted at ASSETS 2009. The ASSETS conference explores the use of computing and information technologies to help persons with disabilities and older adults. This year it will be held in Pittsburgh, USA.
This paper is part of a collaboration work between the UK EPSRC funded RIAM project (EP/E002218/1), and the University of Udine. This full technical paper "How Much Does Expertise Matter? A Barrier Walkthrough Study with Experts and Non-Experts" by Yeliz Yesilada, Giorgio Brajnik and Simon Harper, investigates the interplay between expert and non-expert evaluation by conducting a Barrier Walkthrough (BW) study with 19 expert and 51 non-expert judges. The BW method provides an evaluation framework that can be used to manually assess the accessibility of Web pages for different user groups including motor impaired, hearing impaired, low vision, cognitive impaired, etc. this paper concludes that the level of expertise is an important factor in the quality of accessibility evaluation of Web pages. Expert judges spent significantly less time than non-experts; rated themselves as more productive and confident than non-experts; and ranked and rated pages differently against each type of disability. Finally, both effectiveness, which is the quality of finding all and only true accessibility problems, and reliability, which is the repeatability of the outcomes when used in different context, of the expert judges are significantly higher than non-expert judges.