The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Survey instrument for the universal design of consumer products
Abstract
Universal design is a process intended to include all user groups in product or environmental design. The objective of this study was to develop a usability testing survey instrument to inform how well consumer products complied with established principles of universal design. Thirty-six adults, aging adults and adult wheelchair users performed standardized tasks with pens, food storage containers, pliers and calculators, and for each task responded to a preliminary set of survey items and rated task difficulty. Factor analysis of the survey responses produced an eleven-factor solution that accounted for 67% of the variance in scores and corresponded fairly closely to the principles of universal design. Analysis of scale scores developed from each factor showed that some of the scales were sensitive to product feature and user group differences, and were negatively associated with perceived task difficulty. Such a tool may aid designers who intend their products for user groups of diverse abilities and preferences.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Progress has been made in developing and validating new instruments to assess product and environmental usability based on universal design criteria (Beecher & Paquet, 2005; Fange & Iwarsson, 1999, 2007; Iwarsson, Horstmann, Carlsson, Oswald, & Wahl, 2009; Lenker, Nasarwanji, Paquet, & Feathers, 2011).”
From Design Principles to Accommodate Older Adults (2012) · cites this paper as Beecher & Paquet, 2005
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 15
- Connell, B.R., Jones, M., Mace, R., Mueller, J., Mullick, A., Ostroff, E., Sanford, J., Steinfeld, E., Story, M., Vanderheiden, G., 1996. Development and validation of principles of universal design. In Proceedings of the RESNA 1996 Annual Conference pp. 435–437.
- Ferketich, 1990, Factor analysis revisited, Nurs. Res., 39, 59, 10.1097/00006199-199001000-00012 · DOI
- Law, C.M., Vanderheiden, G.C., 1999. Tests for screening product designs prior to user testing by people with functional limitations. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 43rd Annual Meeting, pp. 868–872. · DOI
- Law, C.M., Vanderheiden, G.C., 2000. Reducing sample sizes when user testing with people who have, and who are simulating disabilities—experiences with blindness and public information kiosks. In Proceedings of the IEA 2000/HFES 2000 Congress, pp. 4-157–4-160. · DOI
- Molenbroek, 1987, Anthropometry of elderly people in the Netherlands; research and applications, Appl. Ergon., 18, 187, 10.1016/0003-6870(87)90003-2 · DOI
- Mueller, 1998, Assistive technology and universal design in the workplace, Assist. Technol., 10, 37, 10.1080/10400435.1998.10131959 · DOI
- Rahman, 1997, Physical accessibility guidelines of consumer product controls, Assist. Technol., 9, 3, 10.1080/10400435.1997.10132291 · DOI
- Sanford, 1998, Consumer participation to inform universal design, Technol. Disabil., 9, 149, 10.3233/TAD-1998-9306 · DOI
- Schwartz, 1998, The Schwartz Cancer Fatigue Scale: testing reliability and validity, Oncol. Nurs. Forum, 25, 711
- Steinfeld, 1990, Universal design: the case of the hand, Innovation, Fall, 27
- Story, 1997, Is it universal? 7 Defining criteria, Innovation, 16, 29
- Story, 1998, Maximizing usability: the principles of universal design, EDS Assist. Technol., 10, 4, 10.1080/10400435.1998.10131955 · DOI
- Story, M.F., Mueller, J.L., Montoya-Weiss, M., 2000. Progress in the development of universal design performance measures. In Proceedings of the RESNA 2000 Annual Conference, pp. 132–134.
- Story, M.F., Mueller, J.L., Montoya-Weiss, M., 2001. Completion of universal design performance measures. In Proceedings of the RESNA 2001 Annual Conference, pp. 109–111.
- Vanderheiden, G.C., Tobias, J., 2000. Universal design of consumer products: current industry practice and perceptions. In Proceedings of the IEA 2000/HFES 2000 Congress, pp. 6-19–6-22. · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Design Principles to Accommodate Older Adults
Farage, M. A., Miller, K. W., Ajayi, F., & Hutchins, D. (2012) · Global Journal of Health Science · doi:10.5539/gjhs.v4n2p2 · Cited by 233
“Temporary blocks in retrieval can occur; an example is the “tip of the tongue” experience—the inability to instantly recall a particular term but retrieving it subsequently.”
BackgroundAn interdisciplinary heuristic evaluation method for universal building design.
Afacan, Y., & Erbug, Ç. (2009) · Applied Ergonomics · doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2008.07.002 · Cited by 116
“Although usability testing is the most widely used method ‘‘for minimizing mismatches between users and products’’ (Beecher and Paquet, 2005, p. 36), universal design, which aims to design for the vast majority of the world, has yet to be integrated into usability tests.”
MethodA Universalist strategy for the design of Assistive Technology
Plos, O., Buisine, S., Aoussat, A., Mantelet, F., & Dumas, C. (2012) · International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics · doi:10.1016/j.ergon.2012.09.003 · Cited by 77
“Ergonomics also provides evaluation tools for products and environments developed within the framework of Universal Design (Beecher and Paquet, 2005; Afacan and Erbug, 2009; Gray et al., 2012) as well as design guidelines (Nisbet, 1996; Abascal and Nicolle, 2005).”
BackgroundHousing for the aging population
Demirkan, H. (2007) · European Review of Aging and Physical Activity · doi:10.1007/s11556-007-0016-z · Cited by 68
“Research related to the universal design flourished more in the product field [ 4 , 19, 20, 59, 62] than architecture [44].”
BackgroundAfacan, Y., & Demirkan, H. (2010) · doi:10.1080/09544820903303423 · Cited by 42
“…international universal design and human factors design resources presented in literature (Grist et al. 1996, Goldsmith 1997, The Center for Universal Design 2000, Mullick and Levine 2001, Young and Pace 2001, Beecher and Paquet 2005, Canadian Human Rights Commission 2006, Afacan 2008a, 2008b).”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Beecher, V., & Paquet, V.
- Affiliations
- University at Buffalo, State University of New York (US)
- Corresponding author
- Paquet, Victor
- ORCID
- Paquet, Victor
- Venue
- Applied Ergonomics
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2005-05
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 363-372
- ISSN
- 0003-6870 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1970250375
- Cited by
- 75
- References
- 17
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 13.17
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Applied Ergonomics (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Assistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
- Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Digital Accessibility for Disabilities
- Keywords
- universal design, usability testing, questionnaire development, consumer goods, older adults, wheelchair users, task difficulty, product accessibility, scale development, factor analysis
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Aged, Consumer Product Safety, Data Collection, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Humans, Middle Aged, Research Design, Task Performance and Analysis
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Survey instrument for the universal design of consumer products. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.apergo.2004.10.014
- The paper
- Beecher, V., & Paquet, V. (2005). Survey instrument for the universal design of consumer products. Applied Ergonomics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2004.10.014
