Comparative Analysis of Usability and Accessibility of Kiosks for People with Disabilities
Source abstract
Abstract
Owing to technological advancements, kiosks have become more prevalent in public places. When using such kiosks, elderly persons and people with disabilities face problems related to accessibility and usability, such as difficulties in kiosk operations such as menu selection and in accessing the kiosk space. Previous studies have usually included accessibility as a subset of usability. However, in this study, we aim to redefine the relationship between these two concepts with a focus on newly emerging kiosk devices. First, we performed a literature review to thoroughly analyze these concepts. Then, we conducted a focus group interview (FGI) targeting people with visual, hearing, and physical impairments to learn about the difficulties that these people face when using kiosks. Finally, we analyzed the characteristics of accessibility and usability related to kiosks and designed a diagram that illustrated the relationship between them. While accessibility and usability shared similarities regarding consistency and user control, they differed deeply regarding their subcategory items; many opinions on accessibility were related to essential functions, whereas many on usability were related to psychological factors such as additional functions or personal preferences. These results can be useful when creating laws and guidelines regarding the accessibility and usability of kiosks or when developing kiosk functions.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Assistive Technology in Communication and Mobility · Technology Use by Older Adults · Digital Accessibility for Disabilities
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Artificial Intelligence Convergence, Kwangwoon University, Seoul 01897, Republic of Korea
Department of Industrial and Management Engineering, Incheon National University (INU), Incheon 22012, Republic of Korea
School of Information Convergence, Kwangwoon University, Seoul 01897, Republic of Korea
Funding
National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF)
References (54)
Show source-provided references
1. Yoon, Y., and Ha, K. (2021, January 27–29). A Study on the Direction of Digital Inclusion for the Development of Middle and Elderly Education System: Focusing on Unmanned Order Payment Kiosk. Proceedings of the Korean HCI Society Conference, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
2. Kaur, H., and Malhotra, S. (2018, January 21–23). Use of “Kiosks” as Self Service Tools in Libraries. Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium on Emerging Trends and Technologies in Libraries and Information Services (ETTLIS), Noida, India.10.1109/ETTLIS.2018.8485257 ↗
3. How customers motive attributions impact intentions to use an interactive kiosk in store10.1016/j.jretconser.2022.102918 ↗
4. Usability Testing of a 3D Touch Screen Kiosk System for Way-Finding10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.006 ↗
5. Lee, Y., Jeon, H., Kim, H.K., and Park, S. (2020, January 21–25). Literature Review on Accessibility Guidelines for Self-Service Terminals. Proceedings of the ACHI 2020: The Thirteenth International Conference on Advances in Computer-Human Interactions, Valencia, Spain.
6. Multifunctional interactive furniture for smart cities
7. User Experience Design of a Prototype Kiosk: A Case for the Istanbul Public Transportation System10.1080/10447318.2016.1199179 ↗
8. The use of a self-check-in kiosk for early patient identification and queuing in the emergency department10.1017/cem.2019.349 ↗
9. Innovative framework for self-service kiosks: Integrating customer value knowledge10.1016/j.jik.2019.06.001 ↗
10. Toward unified guidelines for kiosk accessibility10.1145/3337779 ↗
11. Nam, J., and Kim, S. (2022, January 20–21). Why do elderly people feel negative about the use of self-service technology and how do they cope with the negative emotions. Proceedings of the 31st European Conference of the International Telecommunications Society (ITS): “Reining in Digital Platforms? Challenging Monopolies, Promoting Competition and Developing Regulatory Regimes”, Gothenburg, Sweden.
12. Di Bucchianico, G. (2020). Advances in Design for Inclusion. AHFE 2019. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-94622-1 ↗
13. Albert, B., and Tullis, T. (2013). Measuring the User Experience: Collecting, Analyzing, and Presenting Usability Metrics, Newnes. [2nd ed.].
14. Usability of mobile applications: A systematic literature study10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2981892 ↗
15. Shaking the usability tree: Why usability is not a dead end, and a constructive way forward10.1080/0144929X.2018.1541255 ↗
16. (1998). Ergonomic Requirements for Office Work with Visual Display Terminals (VDTs)—Part 11: Guidance on Usability (Standard No. ISO 9241-11:1998).
17. Developing Elements of User Experience for Mobile Phones and Services: Survey, Interview, and Observation Approaches10.1002/hfm.20316 ↗
18. How User Experience Changes Over Time: A Case Study of Social Network Services10.1002/hfm.20583 ↗
19. (2008). Ergonomics of Human-System Interaction—Part 171: Guidance on Software Accessibility (Standard No. ISO 9241-171:2008).
20. Defining and Classifying IT Interaction Disability10.1080/0144929X.2016.1240233 ↗
21. Buß, R. (2020). Human-Computer Interaction. Human Values and Quality of Life: Thematic Area, HCI 2020, Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference, HCII 2020, Copenhagen, Denmark, July 19–24 2020, Springer International Publishing. Part III 22.
22. Moore, A., Boyle, B., and Lynch, H. (2022). Designing for inclusion in public playgrounds: A scoping review of definitions, and utilization of universal design. Disabil. Rehabil. Assist. Technol., Online published.10.1080/17483107.2021.2022788 ↗
23. Stephanidis, C. (2009). The Universal Access Handbook, CRC Press. [1st ed.].10.1201/9781420064995 ↗
24. Web Acessibility: Filtering Redundant and Irrelevant Information Improves Website Usability for Blind Users10.1016/j.ijhcs.2017.10.011 ↗
25. Kim, H.K., and Park, J. (2020). Examination of the Protection Offered by Current Accessibility Acts and Guidelines to People with Disabilities in Using Information Technology Devices. Electronics, 9.10.3390/electronics9050742 ↗
26. Kim, N., Park, J., Park, J., Kim, H.K., Choe, M., Park, J., and Kim, J. (2020). Usability evaluation of symbols in digital cluster for drivers with color vision deficiency. Univ. Access Inf. Soc., 1–15.
27. Hartson, R., and Pyla, P.S. (2012). The UX Book: Process and Guidelines for Ensuring a Quality User Experience, Elsevier.
28. A Review of User-Interface Design Guidelines for Public Information Kiosk Systems10.1006/ijhc.1998.0243 ↗
29. Pacheco, P., Santos, F., Coimbra, J., Oliveira, E., and Rodrigues, N.F. (2020, January 1–8). Designing Effective User Interface Experiences for a Self-Service Kiosk to Reduce Emergency Department Crowding. Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE 8th International Conference on Serious Games and Applications for Health (SeGAH), Vancouver, BC, Canada.10.1109/SeGAH49190.2020.9201858 ↗
30. User Interface Design for Public Kiosks: An Evaluation of the Taiwan High Speed Rail Ticket Vending Machine
31. Thatcher, J., Bohman, P., Burks, M., Henry, S.L., Regan, B., Swierenga, S., Urban, M.D., and Waddell, C.D. (2003). Constructing Accessible Web Sites, Apress. [1st ed.].10.1007/978-1-4302-1116-7 ↗
32. Petrie, H., and Kheir, O. (May, January 28). The Relationship Between Accessibility and Usability of Websites. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, San Jose, CA, USA.
33. Usability, User Experience and Accessibility: Towards an Integrative Model10.1080/00140139.2020.1774080 ↗
34. The Interaction Experiences of Visually Impaired People With Assistive Technology: A Case Study of Smartphones10.1016/j.ergon.2016.07.002 ↗
35. Exploring the Relationship Between Web Accessibility and User Experience10.1016/j.ijhcs.2016.03.008 ↗
36. A Study on Evaluation of Accessibility of Public Institution Kiosks
37. Inclusion, access, and accessibility of educational resources in higher education institutions: Exploring the Ethiopian context10.1080/13603116.2020.1817580 ↗
38. Silva, G.M.S., de C. Andrade, R.M., de Gois, R., and Darin, T. (2019, January 1–10). Design and evaluation of mobile applications for people with visual impairments: A compilation of usable accessibility guidelines. Proceedings of the 18th Brazilian Symposium on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Vitória, ES, Brazil.10.1145/3357155.3358450 ↗
39. Bridging the Gap: Between Accessibility and Usability10.1145/947226.947227 ↗
40. A Unified Methodology for the Evaluation of Accessibility and Usability of Mobile Applications10.1007/s10209-009-0180-1 ↗
41. Accessibility, usability, quality performance, and readability evaluation of university websites of Turkey: A comparative study of state and private universities10.1007/s10209-020-00715-w ↗
42. Macakoğlu, Ş.S., Peker, S., and Medeni, İ.T. (2022). Accessibility, usability, and security evaluation of universities’ prospective student web pages: A comparative study of Europe, North America, and Oceania. Univ. Access Inf. Soc., Online published.10.1007/s10209-022-00869-9 ↗
43. Accessibility, usability, and security evaluation of Hungarian government websites10.1007/s10209-020-00716-9 ↗
44. Accessibility analysis of higher education institution websites of Portugal10.1007/s10209-019-00653-2 ↗
45. Staggers, J. (2019, January 4–6). Startup Workplace, Mobile Games, and Older Adults: A Practical Guide on UX, Usability, and Accessibility Evaluation. Proceedings of the SIGDOC ’19: The 37th ACM International Conference on the Design of Communication, Portland, OR, USA.
46. Review of Accessibility and Usability Guidelines for Website Design for the Elderly People10.18046/syt.v15i42.2537 ↗
47. Evaluating the accessibility of public health websites: An exploratory cross-country study10.1007/s10209-020-00788-7 ↗
48. Antona, M., and Stephanidis, C. (2020, January 19–24). A Systematic Review of Usability Evaluation Methods and Tools for ATM Interfaces. Proceedings of the International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, Copenhagen, Denmark.
49. Luo, Z., Wang, Y., and Wang, P. (2018, January 8–9). Usability Study on Railway Self-Service Terminal Interface for the Elderly. Proceedings of the 2018 11th International Symposium on Computational Intelligence and Design (ISCID), Hangzhou, China.10.1109/ISCID.2018.00043 ↗
50. Stephanidis, C. (2009). The Universal Access Handbook, CRC Press. [1st ed.].10.1201/9781420064995 ↗
51. The Voice of the Customer10.1287/mksc.12.1.1 ↗
52. Development of a comprehensive design guideline to evaluate the user experiences of meal-assistance robots considering human-machine social interactions
53. Running focus groups with elderly and disabled elderly participants10.1016/S0003-6870(00)00031-4 ↗
54. Flick, U. (2018). The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Data Collection, Sage.10.4135/9781526416070 ↗