Cited by 67Usability and User Interface DesignDigital Accessibility for DisabilitiesAssistive Technology in Communication and Mobility

Investigating the applicability of user models for motion-impaired users

Open access
Keates, Simeon, Clarkson, John, Robinson, Peter·2000·Proceedings of the fourth international ACM conference on Assistive technologies

Abstract

This paper considers the differences between users with motion-impairments and able-bodied users when they interact with computers and the implications for user models. Most interface design and usability assessment practices are based on explicit or implicit models of user behaviour. This paper studies the applicability of an existing interface design user model to motion-impaired users for the relatively straightforward task of button activation. A discussion of the empirical results is provided and the paper concludes that there are significant differences between the behaviour of motion-impaired users and the accepted modelling theory.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/354324.354354

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Mahoney, R. Robotic products for rehabilitation: Status and strategy, in Proceedings of ICORR '97, (Bath, UK, 1997), 12-22.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Keates, S., Clarkson, J., & Robinson, P.
Affiliations
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
  • Department of Engineering, University of Cambridge, Trumpington Street, Cambridge CB2 1PZ, UK
Venue
Proceedings of the fourth international ACM conference on Assistive technologies
Publisher
ACM
Published
2000-11-13
Pages
129-136
OpenAlex
W2090892329
Cited by
67
References
10
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 3
FWCI
1.62
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility (ASSETS) (publishedVersion)
  • Greenwich Academic Literature Archive (University of Greenwich) (submittedVersion)
  • Cambridge University Engineering Department Publications Database (submittedVersion)
  • Research Output (Edinburgh Napier University) (submittedVersion)
  • Edinburgh Napier Research Repository (Edinburgh Napier University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
  • Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Digital Accessibility for Disabilities
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Assistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
Keywords
user models, motion impairment, accessibility, interface design, usability evaluation, user behavior modeling, assistive technology

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