"It's like Goldilocks:" Bespoke Slides for Fluctuating Audience Access Needs
Kelly Avery Mack, Kate S Glazko, Jamil Islam, Megan Hofmann, Jennifer Mankoff · 2024 · Proceedings of the 26th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS 2024) · doi:10.1145/3663548.3675640
Summary
This paper challenges the assumption that a single "accessible" slide deck can serve all audience members by demonstrating that access needs related to presentations are bespoke (varying greatly between individuals) and fluctuating (changing for one person throughout the day based on energy, environment, and symptoms). The researchers conducted a three-phase study: focus groups with 17 people with diverse disabilities (neurodivergent, chronically ill, blind/low vision, Deaf, and others), a design probe presentation session with 14 of those participants using customised slide decks, and interviews with 4 slide deck authors and presenters. Participants' disabilities ranged widely, and 10 had multiple disabilities. In the focus groups, participants specified their ideal slide properties, revealing deeply conflicting needs: some needed dark backgrounds to prevent migraines while others needed light backgrounds for readability; some wanted high contrast while others found it painful; some preferred colourful slides for attention while others found colours overwhelming. The most requested customisations were font/background colour (15 participants), amount of content per slide (13), font family (8), font size (7), and colour contrast (6). The research team then manually created bespoke versions of a presentation deck for each participant and tested them during a live Zoom presentation. Finally, the team built a functional Google Slides plug-in prototype called "Slide Repair" that implements a subset of the requested features, including font changes, colour adjustments, contrast settings, line spacing, animation removal, alt text identification, and document export.
Key findings
Access needs conflicted not only between different people but within a single person over time. One participant described needing different contrast levels depending on menstrual cycle, fatigue, ambient lighting, and how much reading they had already done that day—"it's a little more like Goldilocks, where I need that sweet spot more and more." Participants used slides before, during, and after presentations for different purposes: previewing to build a mental framework, following along during delivery, and reviewing missed content afterward. They wanted different levels of detail for each context—fewer words during the live presentation but more context for review. The presentation probe revealed that while customised slides removed barriers, they also introduced cognitive overhead: participants struggled to synchronise their custom copy with the presenter's location and found following two versions mentally taxing. Participants suggested features like a small overlay showing the presenter's current slide for synchronisation. Presenter interviews revealed general support for the concept but resistance to automated text summarisation (risk of misrepresenting content) and layout changes. Both audiences valued that the tool modified a local copy without altering the presenter's original. A critical finding was that power dynamics significantly affected whether audience members felt comfortable requesting accommodations—many avoided asking when senior leaders were presenting.
Relevance
This research fundamentally reframes slide deck accessibility from a one-time authoring checklist to an audience-driven, real-time customisation challenge. For accessibility practitioners, the key takeaway is that no single set of "accessible" design choices can satisfy everyone—what helps one person actively harms another. This validates the need for personalisation tools rather than prescriptive guidelines alone. The paper also highlights an under-researched population in slide accessibility: people with chronic illnesses, neurodivergence, and mental health conditions whose needs fluctuate and are rarely considered alongside traditional blind/low-vision accommodations. The Google Slides plug-in prototype demonstrates technical feasibility but also reveals significant API limitations in both Google Slides and PowerPoint that prevent full implementation—a call to action for platform developers to expose more accessibility-relevant functionality. The concept of "crip time"—that disabled people experience time differently—applied to presentation pacing is particularly valuable for anyone designing synchronous educational or professional content.
Tags: slide accessibility · presentation accessibility · customizable interfaces · fluctuating access needs · neurodivergence · chronic illness · low vision