Web Accessibility for the Blind: Corporate Social Responsibility or Litigation Avoidance? Jonathan...
-
date post
21-Dec-2015 -
Category
Documents
-
view
220 -
download
3
Transcript of Web Accessibility for the Blind: Corporate Social Responsibility or Litigation Avoidance? Jonathan...
Web Accessibility for the Blind:
Corporate Social Responsibility or Litigation Avoidance?
Jonathan FrankSuffolk University
Boston, MA
Background
45m. blind individuals worldwide 1.3m. blind individuals in US (0.48%
pop.) Web Accessibility Guidelines & Laws Lawsuits
Text Browser & Screen Reader
Previous Work on Web Accessibility Frustrated and annoyed blind users [Lazar
et al, 2004] Time-oriented accessibility ignored [Takagi
2004] Website increasing complexity [Zeng et al
2004] Developers use syntactical checking
[Mankoff 2005] Lack of training, client support, confusing
guidelines, inadequate software tools [Lazar et al, 2004]
Corporate Social Responsibility
CSR Postures
Reactive Defensive Accommodative Proactive
Model
CSR Propensity
Perceived Litigation Threat
Website Accessibility
(CSR Posture)
Product/ Service Type
Web Media Complexity
+
+
+/-
-Time
+
+
Measuring Accessibility
Enabling people with disabilities to perceive, understand, navigate, and interact with the Web” [Henry 2006]
Limitation of popular tools Alternative approach -- aDesigner –
IBM navigability and listenability metrics
Sample
A&P CompUSA Radio Shack
Albertsons Family Dollar Rite Aid
Barnes & Noble Kmart Ross Stores
Bed Bath and Beyond Lowe's Sears
BJ's Marshall Supervalu
Blockbuster Menard T.J.Maxx
Burlington Coat Factory Office Depot Wal-Mart
Costco Office Max Wegmans
Dillard's Publix Whole Foods Markets
Dollar General QVC Winn-Dixie
Method
Wayback Machine Initially sampled 1st occurrence of
homepage 4/03, 2/06, & 6/07
Declining Accessibility
Name Apr-03 Feb-06 Jun-07
Costco 100 49 49
Burlington Coat 88 65 44
Marshall 74 72 40
T.J.Maxx 86 72 60
Radio Shack 18 0 0
Target Corp Improves Accessibility
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Feb-06 Lawsuit Jun-07
Acc
essi
bil
ity
Worst Accessibility 2007
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
RadioShack
Bed Bath& Beyond
OfficeMax
Costco QVC Meijer Marshall OfficeDepot
Wal-Mart
Acc
essi
bili
ty
Best Accessibility 2007
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
BJ's CompUSA Rite Aid Dillard's Sears Barnes &Noble
Albertsons Winn-Dixie Target
Ac
ce
ss
ibil
ity
Gains in Accessibility after Target Case Begins(Feb-06 to Jun-07)
% Change Feb-06 to Jun-07
0%
200%
400%
600%
800%
1000%
1200%
Winn-Dixie
QVC Wal-Mart
Rite Aid Target BJ's Sears Dillard's Meijer
Retailers’ reaction to the Target case
Apr-2003 Feb-2006 P
Accessibility 49.2 53.4 0.1904
Feb-2006 June-2007 P
Accessibility 53.4 74.5 0.0000
CSR Propensity & Accessibility
Top CSR Companies IBM, Fannie Mae, Avon Products, Timberland, Bank of America, Southwest Airlines, FedEx Corp., JP Morgan Chase, Symantec Corp., Lexmark International, New York Times, Microsoft, Charles Schwab, Marriott International, Adobe Systems, Hewlett-Packard
Sample Companies BedBath, QVC, Walmart, Radioshack, Officemax, KMart, Winn-Dixie, Target, Riteaid, Barns and Noble, Apsupermarket, Meijer, CompUSA, Blockbuster, Marshallonline, Dollargeneral , Lowes, Dillards, Wholefoods, BJs, Costco, Albertsons, Publix, Tjmaxx, Burlingtoncoatfactory, Rosstore, Office depot, Familydollar, Wegmans, Supervalu
Regression results t=1,2…7 Anova of Betas
Slope before Feb-
06Slope after Feb-
06 P
Sample companies (N=27) 1.806 11.107
0.006
Top CSR companies (N=14) 1.812 2.553
0.425
Conclusions