Dyslexic users often do not exhibit spelling and reading skills at a level required to perform effective search. To explore whether autocomplete functions reduce the impact of dyslexia on information searching, 20 participants with dyslexia and 20 controls solved 10 predefined tasks in the search engine Google. Eye‐tracking and screen‐capture documented the searches. There were no significant differences between the dyslexic students and the controls in time usage, number of queries, query lengths, or the use of the autocomplete function. However, participants with dyslexia made more misspellings and looked less at the screen and the autocomplete suggestions lists while entering the queries. The results indicate that although the autocomplete function supported the participants in the search process, a more extensive use of the autocomplete function would have reduced misspellings. Further, the high tolerance for spelling errors considerably reduced the effect of dyslexia, and may be as important as the autocomplete function.
Information seeking and access are essential for users in all walks of life, from addressing personal needs such as finding flights to locating information needed to complete work tasks. Over the past decade or so, the general needs of people with impairments have increasingly been recognized as something to be addressed, an issue embedded both in international treaties and in state legislation. The same tendency can be found in research, where a growing number of user studies including people with impairments have been conducted. The purpose of these studies is typically to uncover potential barriers for access to information, especially in the context of inaccessible search user interfaces. This literature review provides an overview of research on the information seeking and searching of users with impairments. The aim is to provide an overview to both researchers and practitioners who work with any of the user groups identified. Some diagnoses are relatively well represented in the literature (for instance, visual impairment), but there is very little work in other areas (for instance, autism) and in some cases no work at all (for instance, aphasia). Gaps are identified in the research, and suggestions are made regarding areas where further research is needed.
This paper presents the results of an interview‐based study of the use of virtual learning environments (VLEs) among dyslexic students. Interviews were carried out with 12 informants who had been formally diagnosed as dyslexic. The informants were either enrolled in a university or college programme, or had graduated less than a year before the interview. The findings reveal that dyslexic students experience a number of challenges associated with VLE use, including information overload, imperfect word processing tools, inadequate search functions, and having to relate to more than one system at a time.
A significant portion of the population have dyslexia, which is commonly associated with reading and writing difficulties. In the context of developing materials well-suited for users with reading disorders, one solution has been to develop materials especially targeted at dyslexic users. However, how are the attitudes among users with dyslexia towards adaptation? In this paper, we report the findings from qualitative interviews with 20 adults with dyslexia. The main finding was that they were sceptical towards adapted products, among others because it made them "feel stupid" and because the adapted format affected the reading experience negatively. In this paper we argue to instead work within the universal design paradigm, trying to develop products and services usable by all people, thus reducing the need for particular user groups to utilise "special solutions".
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.