Perception and Adoption of Mobile Accessibility Features by Older Adults Experiencing Ability Changes
Rachel L. Franz, Jacob O. Wobbrock, Yi Cheng, Leah Findlater · 2019 · Proceedings of the 21st International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS 2019) · doi:10.1145/3308561.3353780
Summary
This paper presents the first empirical study exploring how older adults experiencing progressive ability changes perceive and adopt built-in mobile accessibility features on smartphones and tablets. The researchers conducted interviews with 14 older adults (aged 65-93, mean 77) who self-reported experiencing changes in vision, hearing, mobility, dexterity, or cognition within the past five years, along with six of their family members. The study was grounded in the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT), and an Ability-Based Design perspective that focuses on what older adults can do rather than what they cannot. During interviews, participants discussed their ability changes, how these affected device use, and their awareness of accessibility features. The researcher then walked participants through relevant accessibility features on their own devices — an average of 3.5 features per person, selected based on their reported ability changes. Four to six weeks later, follow-up phone interviews assessed whether participants had adopted any of the demonstrated features. The study found a critical disconnect: while older adults were experiencing ability changes that accessibility features could address, most were unaware these features existed, found them difficult to locate and configure, and did not identify as needing "accessibility" tools.
Key findings
Prior to the study, only 3 of 14 older adults had adopted accessibility features on their mobile devices — and all three had experienced a disability before age 65 (cerebral palsy since birth, blindness since birth, paraplegia since age 45). This strongly suggests that people who develop adaptive technology skills earlier in life carry those skills forward, while those experiencing progressive ability changes for the first time in later life lack awareness and know-how. Most older adults did not use trial-and-error to explore their devices, a reluctance their family members attributed to ability changes reducing confidence. At follow-up, five participants had continued using features demonstrated during the interview (speak selection, invert colors, home button ends call, AssistiveTouch), but four had reduced their font size back down because larger text slowed their reading speed. Many who did not adopt features had simply forgotten they existed or forgotten how to activate them, and lacked social support to reinforce learning. The "accessibility" label itself was problematic: P14 said she hoped it was "something I won’t need" and associated it with her body "falling apart." P1 noted it was strange that useful features like screen rotation were buried under accessibility settings. Accessibility features also failed to accommodate combinations of impairments — features requiring multi-touch gestures (zoom, magnification) were unusable for participants with both vision and dexterity changes, and features requiring memorisation of activation steps were impractical for those with cognitive changes.
Relevance
This paper identifies a fundamental gap in how accessibility features are designed, positioned, and delivered to older adults. The finding that accessibility feature adoption maps more strongly to disability onset timing than to current need has significant implications: the growing population of older adults experiencing progressive ability changes represents a large group who could benefit from existing accessibility tools but are systematically failing to discover and adopt them. The design implications are immediately actionable: present accessibility features as mainstream usability enhancements rather than disability accommodations; enable systems to detect ability changes and proactively recommend or enact interface adjustments; design features that accommodate combinations of impairments (not just isolated abilities); reduce the steps needed to discover, enable, and control features; allow users to preview the effects of settings before committing; and provide ongoing social support mechanisms for reinforcement. The study also reinforces that older adults reject specialised "senior" devices as stigmatising and patronising, preferring mainstream smartphones that can be adapted to their needs — making built-in accessibility features all the more important to get right.
Tags: aging · older adults · mobile accessibility · ability-based design · accessibility features · technology adoption · progressive disability · digital inclusion · stigma · touchscreen accessibility