Prototype Reviews, People With Disabilities, and You
Summary
In this interactive session, Sam Proulx, accessibility evangelist at Fable, will draw from experience as a person with a disability, and from Fable’s thousands of hours of research experience, to answer all of your questions about conducting prototype reviews with people with disabilities. What design systems work best? What disabilities can participate in prototype reviews out of the box, and what types of disabilities might need special adaptations? What information should a prototype contain, to get the best feedback and engagement from people with disabilities? How can you and your organization learn to better shift left, and involve people with disabilities as early as possible in the design process, and why should you? We’ll also have plenty of time for your own questions! If you’ve been wanting to conduct prototype reviews that involve people with disabilities, but weren’t quite sure where to begin, don’t miss this session!
Key Insights
-
•
Starting prototype reviews with screen magnification users offers high impact with minimal adaptation.
-
•
Screen magnification users benefit from graphical prototypes because they can magnify visuals and assess color contrast and text size directly.
-
•
Users with physical challenges may need researchers to operate prototypes on their behalf due to assistive tech limitations, especially with hover and click targets.
-
•
Screen reader users require prototypes with semantic markup like proper heading levels, labeled controls, and landmarks, which traditional wireframes usually lack.
-
•
Prototyping tools like Figma and Adobe currently have limited accessibility support for screen reader users but are actively researching improvements.
-
•
Building prototypes for screen reader users often involves using document-based tools like Microsoft Word or Google Docs to show semantic structure and text equivalents.
-
•
Hover interactions pose significant challenges for users relying on alternative navigation methods such as switch systems or head mice.
-
•
Control labeling consistency in prototypes is crucial to avoid confusion, particularly for those using voice dictation or alternative input.
-
•
Low vision users who do not fully rely on screen readers are the largest group benefiting from improved prototype accessibility.
-
•
Mobile accessibility considerations largely mirror desktop concerns, with screen size and gesture differences being the main changes.
Notable Quotes
"Including people with disabilities in prototype reviews can be different based on the assistive technology they use and their needs."
"Screen magnification is really about making the screen larger, changing color contrast, reducing motion, and panning around the magnified area."
"Screen magnification users are a great place to start because your prototypes and tools will mostly just work with minimal adaptation."
"Users with physical challenges often can see and interpret prototypes but may need help clicking through them because assistive tech may not support the prototype system."
"Screen reader users need semantic structure that graphical prototypes typically don’t have, like labeled headings, controls, tables, and landmarks."
"For screen reader users, you often need to build entirely new prototypes using systems like Microsoft Word or Google Docs to convey semantic information."
"Hover is very difficult for users who use switch systems or head mice because they can only click or not click and have trouble holding steady to hover."
"Consistency between control labels and prototype instructions matters a lot, because mismatches can cause big problems for alternative navigation."
"Most of the work on accessible prototyping for screen readers is still in early or mid research stages but is improving rapidly."
"Involving people with disabilities throughout the product development cycle is crucial, from prototype reviews through to acceptance testing."
Or choose a question:
More Videos
"When projects are late or delayed it’s often due to organizational and cultural issues rather than conduct of the project team."
Carl TurnerYou Can Do This: Understand and Solve Organizational Problems to Jumpstart a Dead Project
March 28, 2023
"Most employees take at least 90 days to onboard and another 90 days to become productive — that’s half a year before you see impact."
Karen PascoeDeveloping Experience Teams and Talent in the Enterprise
June 8, 2016
"Human connection is a basic need that doesn’t get paused just because someone works remotely."
Jilanna WilsonDistributed Design Operations Management
October 23, 2019
"We have over 30 contracting teams spread across roughly 10 vendors all working on parts of the veteran experience landscape."
Shawna Hein Kevin HoffmanCreate a Cohesive Civic Design Practice Across Agency, Vendors, and Contracts
November 17, 2022
"Quick fixes rarely exist in these domains because beneath every problem are layers of complexity."
Barb SpantonDoing Work That Matters: A Look Beyond The Idealistic Notion of 'Doing Meaningful Work'
June 10, 2022
"If a feature didn’t align with our core UX principles, it probably didn’t belong in our application."
Briana ThomasThe Quiet Force: Uncovering Hidden Leadership in High-Impact Design Teams
September 24, 2024
"Therapists create space for clients to reflect and discover insights in a safe environment."
Gina MendoliaTherapists, Coaches, and Grandmas: Techniques for Service Design in Complex Systems
December 3, 2024
"Understanding how assistive technology evolves is crucial because it foretells the future of interface design."
Lija Hogan Milan Mijatovic Sam Proulx Louis RosenfeldThree Years Out: Perspectives on the Near-Term Future of User Research
March 15, 2024
"With our new operating model, partners are more confident funding UX ops because of increased clarity and focus."
John Calhoun Rachel PosmanTwo Sides of the DesignOps Coin: Teams Ops and Product Ops
January 8, 2024
