How Do Professionals Who Create Computing Technologies Consider Accessibility?
Cynthia Putnam, Kathryn Wozniak, Mary Jo Zefeldt, Jinghui Cheng, Morgan Caputo, Carl Duffield · 2012 · Proceedings of the 14th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS 2012) · doi:10.1145/2384916.2384932
Summary
This paper presents survey findings about how UX and HCI professionals consider accessibility in their work, based on responses from 199 participants representing a wide range of job titles and nationalities (recruited via IxDA, SIGCHI, and UPA channels). The survey combined a Likert-scale importance rating with open-ended questions about how professionals actually consider accessibility, alongside the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI) to measure empathy profiles. While 87% of respondents (N=173) rated accessibility as important or very important, the open-ended responses revealed a much more limited picture. Of 185 open-ended responses, 70% (N=129) showed some consideration for accessibility, but only 23% (N=43) were rated as high consideration — meaning they addressed two or more themes such as making accommodations, conducting research/inquiry, knowing laws and guidelines, personal advocacy, and organizational support. The remaining 19% (N=35) fell into a "Should" segment where respondents expressed regret or guilt about not considering accessibility, and 11% (N=21) showed no consideration at all.
Key findings
Several significant patterns emerged. Accessibility considerations were heavily skewed toward visual impairments (52% of accommodations mentioned), with cognitive disabilities (2%), hearing impairments (7%), and physical impairments (22%) receiving far less attention. Only 3% of respondents mentioned consulting external accessibility experts. The Personal Distress dimension of empathy was significantly associated with consideration levels (p<.0125), with the "Should" group scoring highest — suggesting their guilt about not addressing accessibility may be partly driven by emotional response. Professionals in their first ICT job reported significantly lower consideration (75% in lower groups, p<.001), possibly because newer professionals have less agency to advocate for accessibility. Longer total professional experience was associated with higher consideration, but longer tenure in a current position was associated with lower consideration. Job title showed notable (though not statistically significant) patterns: interaction designers and usability specialists tended toward medium/high consideration, while developers showed 58% low consideration. A critical finding was that 26% (N=34) of respondents indicated accessibility decisions were not in their control — driven by laws, organizational policies, or client/budget constraints — revealing both positive (accessibility as a requirement) and negative (accessibility traded off against other priorities) ramifications.
Relevance
This paper provides essential baseline data on the gap between accessibility awareness and actual practice among the professionals who build technology. The finding that 87% say accessibility is important but only 23% demonstrate high consideration reveals a pervasive intention-action gap that remains highly relevant today. For accessibility advocates and educators, the study identifies specific intervention points: the narrow focus on visual impairments suggests curricula need to broaden disability coverage; the low rate of expert consultation indicates organizations need better access to accessibility expertise; and the "lack of control" theme suggests professionals need to be equipped with business-case arguments to advocate for accessibility within their organizations. The association between experience and consideration levels implies that accessibility education should be embedded early in academic programs — preparing students to consider and advocate for inclusive design from the start of their careers, rather than relying on experience to develop these skills. The empathy findings suggest some individuals may be more naturally receptive to accessibility concerns.
Tags: inclusive design · accessibility education · UX professionals · HCI · organizational accessibility · empathy · accessibility advocacy · survey research · professional practice
Standards referenced: WCAG · Section 508 · ADA