The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Evaluating Inclusivity using Quantitative Personas
Open accessAbstract
Exclusion assessment is a powerful method for assessing inclusivity in a quantitative way. However, its focus on capability data makes it difficult to consider the effect of other factors such as different ways of using a product. We propose addressing this by combining exclusion assessment with quantitative personas. Each persona represents a group of people with similar capabilities, and is enhanced with other personal information. The capabilities of each persona are compared against the product demands to assess whether they (and thus the group they represent) could do a task. The additional persona information helps to determine how they approach and conduct the task. By examining personas that cover the whole of the target population, it is possible to estimate the proportion of that population who could complete the task. We present a proof-of-concept study using personas created from Disability Follow-up Survey data. These were used to assess the task of carrying a tray of food across a cafe, taking into account how using mobility aids restricts hand use.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
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?
The cited source doesn’t support the claim as written.
In the citing paper
“While research on inclusive personas [67,107] has addressed the issue of marginalized groups, these studies have often focused on persona creation , not the actual application of personas to solve the problems of minority groups.”
From Use Cases for Design Personas: A Systematic Review and New Frontiers (2022) · cites this paper as [67]
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Still being checked.
Research works printed but not linked: 17
- Brickey, J., Walczak, S., & Burgess, T. (2012). Comparing semi-automated clustering methods for persona development. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 38(3), 537-546. doi: 10.1109/TSE.2011.60 · DOI
- Cambridge Engineering Design Centre (2017). Exclusion Calculator. http://calc.inclusivedesigntoolkit.com (Accessed: March 2018).
- Cambridge Engineering Design Centre (2017b). Inclusive Design Toolkit: Assessing Demand and Exclusion http://www.inclusivedesigntoolkit.com/UCframework/framework.html (Accessed: March 2018).
- Clarkson, J., Cardoso, C., & Hosking, I. (2007). Product Evaluation: Practical Approaches. In: R. Coleman, J. Clarkson, H. Dong, H., & J. Cassim (Eds.), Design for Inclusivity (pp. 181-196). Aldershot, UK: Gower.
- Demin, D. (2009). Replacing assistive technology with inclusive design: Identifying opportunities where inclusive design could cover the shortfall in provision of Assistive Technology for reduced sensory and motor capabilities (Unpublished Masters thesis). University of Cambridge.
- González-de-Heredia, A., Justel, D., Iriarte, I., & Beitia, A. (2017). Review of the tool personas. Proceedings of the 21th International Congress on Project Management and Engineering. Cadiz.
- Goodman-Deane, J. Ward, J. Hosking, I., & Clarkson, P. J. (2014). A comparison of methods currently used in inclusive design. Applied Ergonomics, 45(4), 886-894. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2013.11.005 · DOI
- Goodman-Deane, J., Waller, S., Bradley, M., Bradley, O, & Clarkson, P. J. (2018). Using inclusive design to drive user experience improvements through to implementation. Proceedings of CWUAAT 2018. Cambridge, UK: Springer.
- Grudin, J., & Pruitt, J. (2002). Personas, Participatory Design and Product Development : An Infrastructure for Engagement. Proceedings of PDC 02, the Participatory Design Conference (pp. 144-161).
- Marshall, R., Case, K., Porter, M., Summerskill, S., Gyi, D., Davis, P., & Sims, R. (2010). HADRIAN: a virtual approach to design for all. Journal of Engineering Design, 21(2-3), 253-273. doi: 10.1080/09544820903317019 · DOI
- Marshall, R., Summerskill, S., Case, K., Hussain, A., Gyi, D., Sims, R., Morris, A., & Barnes, J. (2016). Supporting a Design Driven Approach to Social Inclusion and Accessibility in Transport. Social Inclusion, 4(3), 7-23. doi: 10.17645/si.v4i3.521 · DOI
- Miaskiewicz, T., & Kozar, K. A. (2011). Personas and user-centered design: How can personas benefit product design processes? Design Studies, 32(5), 417-430. doi: 10.1016/j.destud.2011.03.003 OECD (2016). Skills Matter: Further results from the survey of adult skills. Retrieved from: http://www.oecd.org/skills/piaac/Skills_Matter_Further_Results_from_the_Survey_of_Adult_Skills.pdf (Accessed: March 2018) · DOI
- Reeder, B., Zaslavksy, O., Wilamowska, K. M., Demiris, G., & Thompson, H. J. (2011). Modeling the oldest old: Personas to design technology-based solutions for older adults. Proceedings of AMIA Annual Symposium 2011 (pp. 1166-75).
- Wöckl, B., Yildizoglu, U., Buber, I., Aparicio Diaz, B., Kruijff, E., & Tscheligi, M. (2012). Basic senior personas: a representative design tool covering the spectrum of European older adults. Proceedings of Assests'12 (pp. 25-32).
- Persad, U., Goodman-Deane, J., Langdon, P., & Clarkson, P. J. (2018). Exploring user capability data with topological data analysis. Proceedings of CWUAAT 2018. Cambridge, UK: Springer.
- Waller, S. D., Langdon, P. M., & Clarkson, P. J. (2010) Using disability data to estimate design exclusion. Universal Access in the Information Society, 9(3), 195-207. doi: 10.1007/s10209-009-0168-x · DOI
- Waller, S. D., Bradley, M. D., Langdon, P. M. and Clarkson, P. J. (2013). Visualising the number of people who cannot perform tasks related to product interactions. Universal Access in the Information Society, 12(3), 263-278. doi: 10.1007/s10209-013-0297-0 · DOI
Cited by
Use Cases for Design Personas: A Systematic Review and New Frontiers
Salminen, J., Wenyun Guan, K., Jung, S.-G., & Jansen, B. (2022) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3491102.3517589 · Cited by 140
Metadata
- Authors
- Goodman-Deane, J., Waller, S., Demin, D., González-de-Heredia, A., Bradley, M., & Clarkson, J. P.
- Affiliations
- University of Cambridge (GB)
- Mondragon University
- University of Cambridge, UK
- Venue
- Proceedings of DRS
- Publisher
- Design Research Society
- Published
- 2018-06-25
- ISSN
- 2398-3132 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2921392304
- Cited by
- 38
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 6
- FWCI
- 3.22
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by-nc
- Locations
- Proceedings of DRS (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- eRepository Mondragon University (Mondragon University) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Persona Design and Applications
- Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Digital Accessibility for Disabilities
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
- Keywords
- disability, task completion, mobility aids, hand use, product accessibility
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
