skip to main content
research-article

The Effect of Font Type on Screen Readability by People with Dyslexia

Authors Info & Claims
Published:07 May 2016Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Around 10% of the people have dyslexia, a neurological disability that impairs a person’s ability to read and write. There is evidence that the presentation of the text has a significant effect on a text’s accessibility for people with dyslexia. However, to the best of our knowledge, there are no experiments that objectively measure the impact of the typeface (font) on screen reading performance. In this article, we present the first experiment that uses eye-tracking to measure the effect of typeface on reading speed. Using a mixed between-within subject design, 97 subjects (48 with dyslexia) read 12 texts with 12 different fonts. Font types have an impact on readability for people with and without dyslexia. For the tested fonts, sans serif, monospaced, and roman font styles significantly improved the reading performance over serif, proportional, and italic fonts. On the basis of our results, we recommend a set of more accessible fonts for people with and without dyslexia.

References

  1. Ability Net. 2013. NHS Choices: Help with accessibility, Changing fonts on your computer. Retrieved from http://www.nhs.uk/accessibilityhelp/index.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. D. Adler-Grinberg and L. Stark. 1978. Eye movements, scan paths, and dyslexia. American Journal of Optometry and Physiological Optics 55, 8 (1978), 557--570.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. American Psychiatric Association. 2000. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: DSM-IV-TR. American Psychiatric Publishing, Inc., New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Yoav Benjamini and Yosef Hochberg. 1995. Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological) 57, 1 (1995), 289--300.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Yoav Benjamini and Daniel Yekutieli. 2001. The control of the false discovery rate in multiple testing under dependency. Annals of Statistics 29, 4 (2001), 1165--1188.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Michael L. Bernard, Barbara S. Chaparro, Melissa M. Mills, and Charles G. Halcomb. 2003. Comparing the effects of text size and format on the readability of computer-displayed times new roman and arial text. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 59, 6 (2003), 823--835. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. V. W. Berninger and B. J. Wolf. 2009. Teaching Students with Dyslexia and Dysgraphia: Lessons from Teaching and Science. Paul H Brookes Pub Co., Baltimore, MD.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. David Beymer, Daniel Russell, and Peter Orton. 2008. An eye tracking study of how font size and type influence online reading. In Proceedings of the 22nd British HCI Group Annual Conference on People and Computers: Culture, Creativity, Interaction - Volume 2 (BCS-HCI’08). British Computer Society, Swinton, UK, 15--18. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Carlo E. Bonferroni. 1936. Teoria statistica delle classi e calcolo delle probabilità. Pubblicazioni del Regio Istituto Superiore di Scienze Economiche e Commerciali di Firenze 8 (1936), 3--62.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Dan Boyarski, Christine Neuwirth, Jodi Forlizzi, and Susan Harkness Regli. 1998. A study of fonts designed for screen display. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’98). ACM Press/Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., New York, NY, 87--94. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/274644.274658 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. J. Boynton, H. Hersh, and T. Tullis. 1995. Readability of fonts in the windows environment interactive posters. In Proceedings of ACM CHI’95 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Vol. 2. ACM, Denver, CO, 127--128. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. British Dyslexia Association. 2012. Dyslexia Style Guide. Retrieved from http://www.bdadyslexia.org.uk/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Nicola Brunswick. 2010. Unimpaired reading development and dyslexia across different languages. In Reading and Dyslexia in Different Orthographies, Sine McDougall and Paul de Mornay Davies (Eds.). Psychology Press, Hove, 131--154.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Georg Buscher, Ralf Biedert, Daniel Heinesch, and Andreas Dengel. 2010. Eye tracking analysis of preferred reading regions on the screen. In CHI’10 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, Atlanta, GA, 3307--3312. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. B. Caldwell, M. Cooper, L. G. Reid, and G. Vanderheiden. 2008. Web content accessibility guidelines (WCAG) 2.0. (2008).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. M. S. Carrillo, J. Alegría, P. Miranda, and Sánchez Pérez. 2011. Evaluación de la dislexia en la escuela primaria: Prevalencia en Español (evaluation of dyslexia in primary school: The prevalence in Spanish). Escritos de Psicología (Psychology Writings) 4, 2 (2011), 35--44.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. C. Chapman. 2011. The Most Popular Fonts Used by Designers. Retrieved from http://www.webdesignerdepot.com/2011/08/the-most-popular-fonts-used-by-designers/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. M. Coleman and T. L. Liau. 1975. A computer readability formula designed for machine scoring. Journal of Applied Psychology 60, 2 (1975), 283.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. F. Cuetos and F. Valle. 1988. Modelos de lectura y dislexias (reading models and dyslexias). Infancia y Aprendizaje (Infancy and Learning) 44 (1988), 3--19.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Rudi W. De Lange, Hendry L. Esterhuizen, and Derek Beatty. 1993. Performance differences between times and helvetica in a reading task. Electronic Publishing 6, 3 (1993), 241--248.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. R. De Leeuw. 2010. Special Font for Dyslexia? Master's thesis. University of Twente.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. A. Dickinson, P. Gregor, and A. F. Newell. 2002. Ongoing investigation of the ways in which some of the problems encountered by some dyslexics can be alleviated using computer techniques. In Proceedings of ASSETS’02. ACM Press, Edinburgh, Scotland, 97--103. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. G. F. Eden, J. F. Stein, H. M. Wood, and F. B. Wood. 1994. Differences in eye movements and reading problems in dyslexic and normal children. Vision Research 34, 10 (1994), 1345--1358.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. R. D. Elterman, L. A. Abel, R. B. Daroff, L. F. Dell’Osso, and J. L. Bornstein. 1980. Eye movement patterns in dyslexic children. Journal of Learning Disabilities 13, 1 (1980), 16--21.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Mariano Fernández Enguita, Luis Mena Martínez, and Jaime Riviere Gómez. 2010. Fracaso y Abandono Escolar en España (School Failure in Spain). Obra Social, Fundación la Caixa, Barcelona, Spain.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Bruce Evans. 2001. Dyslexia and Vision. Vol. 5. Wiley, New Jersey.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. L. Evett and D. Brown. 2005. Text formats and web design for visually impaired and dyslexic readers-clear text for all. Interacting with Computers 17 (2005), 453--472. Issue 4. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. FEDIS. 2008. Presidente de la FEDIS (Federación Española de Dislexia) asiste a las Jornadas de León. (Januray 2008). http://actualidadfedis.blogspot.com.es/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. R. Flesch. 1948. A new readability yardstick. Journal of Applied Psychology 32, 3 (1948), 221.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Rosa Galván Gómez. 2010. Dislexia va en aumento (Dyslexia is increasing). El Peruano (The Peruvian, newspaper). (January 2010). page 22.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. N. E. Goulandris. 2003. Dyslexia in Different Languages: Cross-Linguistic Comparisons. Whurr Publishers, London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. P. Gregor, A. Dickinson, A. Macaffer, and P. Andreasen. 2003. SeeWord: A personal word processing environment for dyslexic computer users. British Journal of Educational Technology 34, 3 (2003), 341--355.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Peter Gregor and A. F. Newell. 2000. An empirical investigation of ways in which some of the problems encountered by some dyslexics may be alleviated using computer techniques. In Proceedings of ASSETS’00 (ASSETS 2000). ACM Press, New York, NY, 85--91. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Robert Hillier. 2008. Sylexiad: A typeface for the adult dyslexic reader. Journal of Writing in Creative Practice 1, 3 (2008), 275--291.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. Yosef Hochberg. 1988. A sharper Bonferroni procedure for multiple tests of significance. Biometrika 75, 4 (1988), 800--802.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. Sture Holm. 1979. A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics 6, 2 (1979), 65--70.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Gerhard Hommel. 1988. A stagewise rejective multiple test procedure based on a modified Bonferroni test. Biometrika 75, 2 (1988), 383--386.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. B. Hornsby. 1986. Overcoming Dyslexia. Martin Dunitz, London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. J. Hyönä and R. K. Olson. 1995. Eye fixation patterns among dyslexic and normal readers: Effects of word length and word frequency. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 21, 6 (1995), 1430.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Albrecht Werner Inhoff and Keith Rayner. 1986. Parafoveal word processing during eye fixations in reading: Effects of word frequency. Perception & Psychophysics 40, 6 (1986), 431--439.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  41. Interagency Commission on Learning Disabilities. 1987. Learning Disabilities: A Report to the U.S. Congress. Government Printing Office, Washington DC.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. International Dyslexia Association. 2011a. Definition of Dyslexia: http://interdys.org/DyslexiaDefinition.htm. (2011). Based in the initial definition of the Research Committee of the Orton Dyslexia Society, former name of the IDA, done in 1994.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. International Dyslexia Association. 2011b. Frequently asked questions about dyslexia. (2011). http://www.interdys.org/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. J. E. Jiménez, R. Guzmán, C. Rodríguez, and C. Artiles. 2009. Prevalencia de las dificultades específicas de aprendizaje: La dislexia en español (the prevalence of specific learning difficulties: Dyslexia in Spanish). Anales de Psicología (Annals of Psychology) 25, 1 (2009), 78--85.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. M. A. Just and P. A. Carpenter. 1980. A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological Review 87 (1980), 329--354.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. G. Kanvinde, L. Rello, and R. Baeza-Yates. 2012. IDEAL: A Dyslexic-friendly e-book reader (poster). In Proceedings of ASSETS’12. ACM Press, Boulder, CO, 205--206. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. S. K. Katusic, R. C. Colligan, W. J. Barbaresi, D. J. Schaid, and S. J. Jacobsen. 2001. Incidence of reading disability in a population-based birth cohort, 1976-1982, Rochester. Mayo Clinic Proceedings 76, 11 (2001), 1081.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  48. Donald E. Knuth. 1986. The Computer Modern Fonts, Volume E of Computers and Typesetting. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. Isla Kriss and Bruce J. W. Evans. 2005. The relationship between dyslexia and Meares-Irlen syndrome. Journal of Research in Reading 28, 3 (2005), 350--364.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  50. S. Kurniawan and G. Conroy. 2006. Comparing Comprehension Speed and Accuracy of Online Information in Students with and without Dyslexia. Idea Group, Hershey, PA, 257--70.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  51. Anthony Lee. 2012. Accessibility issues due to sub-pixel rendering. In Text Customization for Readability, W3C WAI RDWG Online Symposium. W3C.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. Lester A. Lefton, Richard J. Nagle, Gwendolyn Johnson, and Dennis F. Fisher. 1979. Eye movement dynamics of good and poor readers: Then and now. Journal of Literacy Research 11, 4 (1979), 319--328.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. Sharon Lockley. 2002. Dyslexia and higher education: Accessibility issues. The Higher Education Academy. (2002). https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/view/4172057/dyslexia-and-higher-education-accessibility-issues-sharon-lockley.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  54. G. R. Lyon. 1995. Toward a definition of Dyslexia. Annals of Dyslexia 45, 1 (1995), 3--27.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  55. G. R. Lyon, S. E. Shaywitz, and B. A. Shaywitz. 2003. A definition of Dyslexia. Annals of Dyslexia 53, 1 (2003), 1--14.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  56. F. J. Martos and J. Vila. 1990. Differences in eye movements control among dyslexic, retarded and normal readers in the Spanish population. Reading and Writing 2, 2 (1990), 175--188.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  57. Louisa Cook Moats. 2005. The Speech Sounds of English: Phonetics, Phonology, and Phoneme Awareness (Module 2). Technical Report. Sopris West Educational Services.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  58. Sandra E. Moriarty and Edward C. Scheiner. 1984. A study of close-set text type. Journal of Applied Psychology 69, 4 (1984), 700.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  59. R. I. Nicolson and A. J. Fawcett. 2011. Dyslexia, dysgraphia, procedural learning and the cerebellum. Cortex 47, 1 (2011), 117--127.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  60. Jakob Nielsen. 2006. F-shaped pattern for reading web content. https://www.nngroup.com/articles/f-shaped-pattern-reading-web-content/. (2006). Last visited April 13, 2016.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  61. Jakob Nielsen and Kara Pernice. 2010. Eye Tracking Web Usability. New Riders Pub, San Francisco, CA. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  62. Beth A. O’Brien, J. Stephen Mansfield, and Gordon E. Legge. 2005. The effect of print size on reading speed in dyslexia. Journal of Research in Reading 28, 3 (2005), 332--349.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  63. R. K. Olson, R. Kliegl, and B. J. Davidson. 1983. Dyslexic and normal readers’ eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 9, 5 (1983), 816.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  64. Donald G. Paterson and Miles A. Tinker. 1932. Studies of typographical factors influencing speed of reading. X. style of type face. Journal of Applied Psychology 16, 6 (1932), 605.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  65. Francis J. Pirozzolo and Keith Rayner. 1978. The neural control of eye movements in acquired and developmental reading disorders. Studies in Neurolinguistics 4 (1978), 1--27.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  66. Eustace Christopher Poulton. 1965. Letter differentiation and rate of comprehension in reading. Journal of Applied Psychology 49, 5 (1965), 358.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  67. R Development Core Team. 2011. A language and environment for statistical computing (Computer Software). (2011). http://www.R-project.org.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  68. Gary E. Raney and Keith Rayner. 1995. Word frequency effects and eye movements during two readings of a text. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology 49, 2 (1995), 151.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  69. Keith Rayner. 1986. Eye movements and the perceptual span in beginning and skilled readers. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 41, 2 (1986), 211--236.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  70. K. Rayner. 1998. Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin 124 (1998), 372--422.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  71. K. Rayner and S. A. Duffy. 1986. Lexical complexity and fixation times in reading: Effects of word frequency, verb complexity, and lexical ambiguity. Memory & Cognition 14, 3 (1986), 191--201.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  72. Keith Rayner and Gary E. Raney. 1996. Eye movement control in reading and visual search: Effects of word frequency. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 3, 2 (1996), 245--248.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  73. L. Rello. 2014. DysWebxia. A Text Accessibility Model for People with Dyslexia. Ph.D. Dissertation. Universitat Pompeu Fabra.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  74. L. Rello and R. Baeza-Yates. 2013. Good fonts for dyslexia. In Proceedings of ASSETS’13. ACM Press, Bellevue, WA, 14--21. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  75. L. Rello, R. Baeza-Yates, L. Dempere, and H. Saggion. 2013a. Frequent words improve readability and short words improve understandability for people with dyslexia. In Proceedings of INTERACT’13. IFIP, Cape Town, South Africa, 203--219.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  76. L. Rello, R. Baeza-Yates, H. Saggion, C. Bayarri, and S. D. J. Barbosa. 2013b. An iOS reader for people with dyslexia (demo). In Proceedings of ASSETS ’13. ACM Press, Bellevue, Washington, WA, 37--38. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  77. L. Rello, S. Bautista, R. Baeza-Yates, P. Gervás, R. Hervás, and H. Saggion. 2013c. One half or 50%? An eye-tracking study of number representation readability. In Proceedings of INTERACT’13. IFIP, Cape Town, South Africa, 229--245.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  78. L. Rello, G. Kanvinde, and R. Baeza-Yates. 2012. Layout guidelines for web text and a web service to improve accessibility for dyslexics. In Proceedings of W4A ’12. ACM Press, Lyon, France, 1--8. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  79. L. Rello, M. Pielot, and M. C. Marcos. 2015. Make it big! The effect of font size and line spacing on online readability. In Proceedings of CHI 16. ACM, San Jose, CA. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  80. L. Rello, M. Pielot, M. C. Marcos, and R. Carlini. 2013. Size matters (spacing not): 18 points for a dyslexic-friendly wikipedia. In Proceedings of W4A’13. ACM Press, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 1--8. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  81. C. Romani, J. Ward, and A. Olson. 1999. Developmental surface dysgraphia: What is the underlying cognitive impairment? Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 52, 1 (1999), 97--128.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  82. H. Saggion, S. Štajner, S. Bott, S. Mille, L. Rello, and B. Drndarevic. 2015. Making it simplext: Implementation and evaluation of a text simplification system for Spanish. ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing (TACCESS) 6, 14 (2015), 1--14. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  83. L. Sánchez Sampedro. 2012. Impostores (Impostors). Crowdfunding, Madrid, Spain. Retrieved from http://www.impostores.es.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  84. V. F. Santana, R. Oliveira, L. D. A. Almeida, and M. Ito. 2013. Firefixia: An accessibility web browser customization toolbar for people with dyslexia. In Proceedings of W4A’13. ACM, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 1--8. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  85. Francisca Serrano and Sylvia Defior. 2008. Dyslexia speed problems in a transparent orthography. Annals of Dyslexia 58, 1 (2008), 81--95.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  86. A. Dawn Shaikh. 2005. The effects of line length on reading online news. Usability News 7, 2 (2005), 1--4.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  87. S. E. Shaywitz, M. D. Escobar, B. A. Shaywitz, J. M. Fletcher, and R. Makuch. 1992. Evidence that dyslexia may represent the lower tail of a normal distribution of reading ability. New England Journal of Medicine 326, 3 (1992), 145--150.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  88. Speech Therapy Association of Catalonia. 2011. PRODISCAT: Protocol de Detecció i Actuació en la Dislèxia. Àmbit Educativo (Protocol for detection and management of dyslexia. Educational scope). Education Department of the Catalonian government, Barcelona, Spain.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  89. Joy Sykes. 2008. Dyslexia, Design and Reading: Making Print Work for College Students with Dyslexia: A Qualitative Interaction Design Study. Ph.D. Dissertation. Carnegie Mellon School of Design.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  90. Miles A. Tinker. 1963. Influence of simultaneous variation in size of type, width of line, and leading for newspaper type. Journal of Applied Psychology 47, 6 (1963), 380.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  91. Miles Albert Tinker. 1965. Bases for Effective Reading. Vol. 1. University of Minnesota Press Minneapolis.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  92. Tobii Technology. 2005. Product description of Tobii 50 Series. (2005).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  93. V. Topac. 2012. The development of a text customization tool for existing web sites. In Text Customization for Readability Symposium. W3C, New York, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  94. F. R. Vellutino, J. M. Fletcher, M. J. Snowling, and D. M. Scanlon. 2004. Specific reading disability (dyslexia): What have we learned in the past four decades? Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 45, 1 (2004), 2--40.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  95. S. Williams, E. Reiter, and L. Osman. 2003. Experiments with discourse-level choices and readability. In Proceedings of Enlg’03. ACL, Budapest, Hungary, 127134.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  96. World Health Organization. 1993. International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Injuries and Causes of Death (ICD-10) (10th ed.). World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  97. M. Zorzi, C. Barbiero, A. Facoettia, I. Lonciari, M. Carrozzi, M. Montico, L. Bravar, F. George, C. Pech-Georgel, and J. Ziegler. 2012. Extra-large letter spacing improves reading in dyslexia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 109 (2012), 11455--11459.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. The Effect of Font Type on Screen Readability by People with Dyslexia

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in

        Full Access

        • Published in

          cover image ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing
          ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing  Volume 8, Issue 4
          May 2016
          80 pages
          ISSN:1936-7228
          EISSN:1936-7236
          DOI:10.1145/2905046
          Issue’s Table of Contents

          Copyright © 2016 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 7 May 2016
          • Revised: 1 February 2016
          • Accepted: 1 February 2016
          • Received: 1 June 2014
          Published in taccess Volume 8, Issue 4

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article
          • Research
          • Refereed

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader