Software and Technologies Designed for People with Autism: What Do Users Want?
Cynthia Putnam, Lorna Chong · 2008 · Proceedings of the 10th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (Assets '08) · doi:10.1145/1414471.1414475
Summary
This paper reports on an online survey of 114 respondents (12 adults with ASD completing it themselves, 102 submissions about children with ASD from parents, teachers, and professionals) investigating what users actually want from software and technology designed for people with autism. The study was motivated by a disconnect: while researchers and developers have been creating technology solutions for autism for over two decades — including virtual reality simulations, robots, facial recognition instruction, cooperative games, and video modeling — very little was known about how well these products were actually integrated into users' lives. The authors provide a useful summary of why technology is considered a good fit for ASD: software is predictable (matching the need for sameness), allows repetition without impatience, delivers content through visual media (a strength for many with ASD), eliminates social complexity, and provides structured one-on-one learning environments. Countering this optimism, concerns include potential social isolation, obsessive computer use, and uncertainty about whether computer-learned skills generalise to real-world situations.
Key findings
The most striking finding was the gap between researcher enthusiasm and actual adoption: only 25% of respondents had any experience with software designed for people with cognitive disabilities, and only 7% had used products designed specifically for autism. Of the 45 product experiences reviewed, most were PC-based educational software rated moderately positively (effectiveness M=3.44/5, ease of setup M=3.89/5, ease of use M=3.89/5). When asked what they desired in technology, 62% of 136 analysed comments described goals in three domains: social/communication skills (32% of respondents — notably, only 9% of products they had tried addressed social skills), academic skills (20%), and scheduling/organisation (10%). Design suggestions (33% of comments) included making products portable, easier input devices (especially voice activation), sensory-friendly options (adjustable colours and sounds), and — requested by 19% — making learning experiences fun through games. Technology itself was reported as both a major interest (46% mentioned video games, computers, or related technology as interests) and a strength (14% identified computers as a child's strength), confirming technology's appeal to this population. No significant correlations were found between diagnosis, verbal ability, age, or gender and technology use, suggesting these goals are shared broadly across the ASD spectrum.
Relevance
This paper is an early and important example of applying user-centred design thinking to the autism technology space. Its central finding — that researcher and developer enthusiasm for technology solutions far outpaced actual adoption — remains a cautionary tale for accessibility practitioners. The mismatch between what users wanted most (social skills support, 32%) and what was available (mostly educational software, 69% of products tried) highlights the risk of building what developers find technically interesting rather than what users actually need. For technology designers working with the ASD community, the practical insights are valuable: leverage visual strengths and interests in movies/animation, accommodate sensory sensitivities through customisable colours and sounds, design for predictability and repetition, make learning feel like gaming, and consider portability. The finding that no demographic variable predicted technology adoption suggests designers should not narrow their target audience within the autism spectrum but design flexibly for the full range of abilities.
Tags: autism · user-centered design · cognitive accessibility · assistive technology · educational technology · social skills · user research · technology adoption