UNIVERSITY WEBSITE ACCESSIBILITY FOR TOTALLY BLIND USERS
Open accessAbstract
Researchers have discovered significant faults in the accessibility of university websites, especially for visually-impaired users. To determine the requirements for totally blind users, this study conducted a comprehensive literature review and accessibility evaluation on 15 Palestinian university websites. The determined factors were used in designing an accessible web page prototype. An online questionnaire was constructed to evaluate the accessibility of the prototype from the blind users’ perspective. From the evaluation of 16 blind participants, it was found that the prototype was highly accessible (mean score 4.19). The regression analysis test was utilised to determine the relationship between the items and the main principles of accessibility. The results show that there are statistically significant differences between these items. In conclusion, the accessibility factors have been indirectly validated.
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
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?
Paper [54] used automatic evaluation with CynthiaSays and manual evaluation with 16 blind users.
“One paper [54] presented an automatic evaluation using CynthiaSays and a manual evaluation with 16 blind users of the websites of the analyzed universities”
From Accessibility of university websites worldwide: a systematic literature review (2023) · cites this paper as [54]
The Phase One Results report automatic evaluation with CynthiaSays, but it assessed a prototype, not the university websites. The Phase Two Results report feedback from 16 blind users on that prototype; the manual evaluation in Phase One was performed by experts, not those users. The citation therefore combines real elements of the study but misstates what was evaluated and by whom. (LLM, conf=0.89)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredPapers [47, 48, 54, 76] do not state which web pages were evaluated.
“The papers [47, 48, 54, 76] do not refer in their content to the web pages that have been evaluated in the universities.”
From Accessibility of university websites worldwide: a systematic literature review (2023) · cites this paper as [54]
The Introduction (page unavailable) says the paper evaluates Palestinian university websites, but the passages retrieved do not identify which pages of those websites were evaluated. Searches for page selection, homepages, and specific page types found no decisive passage; those results do not establish that the full paper omits this information. (LLM, conf=0.68)
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.
Cites
What Frustrates Screen Reader Users on the Web: A Study of 100 Blind Users
Lazar, J., Allen, A., Kleinman, J., & Malarkey, C. (2007) · International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/10447310709336964 · Cited by 354 · see citing works
Beyond Conformance: The Role of Accessibility Evaluation Methods
Brajnik, G. (2008) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-540-85200-1_9 · Cited by 114 · see citing works
Abou-Zahra, S. (2008) · Human-Computer Interaction Series · doi:10.1007/978-1-84800-050-6_7 · Cited by 73 · see citing works
Understanding Blind Users' Web Accessibility and Usability Problems
The University of North Carolina - Greensboro, Babu, R., Singh, R., The University of North Carolina at Greensboro, U., Ganesh, J., & Limited, I. T. (2010) · AIS Transactions on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.17705/1thci.00015 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 14
- Abanumy, A., Al-Badi, A., & Mayhew, P. (2005). e-Government website accessibility: In-depth evaluation of Saudi Arabia and Oman. The Electronic Journal of e-Government, 3(3), 99-106.
- Al-Khalifa, H. S. (2012). The accessibility of Saudi Arabia government web sites: An exploratory study. Universal Access in the Information Society, 11(2), 201-210.
- Fong, R. Kwan., & F. Wang (Eds.), Human-Computer Interaaction and Usabilty Engineering of the Austrian Computer Society Proceedings, 5169: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 392-403.
- Bakhsh, M., & Mehmood. (2012). A. web accessibility for disabled: A case study of government websites in Pakistan. Frontiers of Information Technology (FIT), 2012 10th International Conference on IEEE, 342-347.
- Elaydi, H. A., & Shehada, H. (2013). Effective factors in successful use of assistive technology at Palestinian universities: Islamic University of Gaza as Case Study. International Journal of Engineering Sciences & Research Technology, 2(4),660-664.
- Harper, K. A., & DeWaters, J. (2008). A quest for website accessibility in higher education institutions. The Internet and Higher Education, 11(3), 160-164.
- Harper, S., Goble, C. A., & Stevens, R. (2001). Web mobility guidelines for visually-impaired surfers. Journal of Research and Practice in Information Technology, 33(1), 30-41.
- Hassouna, M. S., & Sahari, N. B. (2014). Palestinian universities' website accessibility: An initial view. International Conference on Postgraduate Research 2014 (ICPR 2014), Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 327 -335.
- Koutsabasis, P., Vlachogiannis, E., & Darzentas, J. S. (2010). Beyond specifications: Towards a practical methodology for evaluating web accessibility. Journal of Usability Studies, 5(4),157-171.
- Kurt, S. (2011). The accessibility of university websites: The case of Turkish universities. Universal Access in the Information Society, 10 (1): 101-110.
- Lazar, J., Dudley-Sponaugle, A., & Greenidge, K.-D. (2004). Improving web accessibility: A study of webmaster perceptions. Computers in Human Behavior, 20(2), 269-288.
- Lazar, J., Feng, J. H., & Hochheiser, H. (2010). Research methods in human- computer interaction: John Wiley & Sons.
- Slatin, J. M., & Rush, S. (2003). Maximum accessibility: Making your web site more usable for everyone: Addison-Wesley Professional.
- Wanniarachchi, H., & Jayathilake, D. (2012). A framework for building websites that are friendly to visually impaired. Advances in ICT for Emerging Regions (ICTer), 2012 International Conference on IEEE, 103-110.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Empirical Studies on Web Accessibility of Educational Websites: A Systematic Literature Review
Campoverde-Molina, M., Lujan-Mora, S., & Garcia, L. V. (2020) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2020.2994288 · Cited by 94 · see citing works
Accessibility of university websites worldwide: a systematic literature review
Campoverde-Molina, M., Luján-Mora, S., & Valverde, L. (2023) · Universal Access in the Information Society · doi:10.1007/s10209-021-00825-z · Cited by 84 · see citing works
“[54] Asia Palestinian ISO/IEC 40500:2012 (WCAG 2.”
BackgroundMethodInfluential
- Authors
- Hassouna, M. S., Sahari, N., & Ismail, A.
- Affiliations
- National University of Malaysia (MY)
- Faculty of Information Science and Technology Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Malaysia
- Venue
- Journal of Information and Communication Technology
- Publisher
- UUM Press, Universiti Utara Malaysia
- Published
- 2017
- Volume
- 16
- ISSN
- 1675-414X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2734629997
- Cited by
- 26
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 2
- FWCI
- 11.48
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of Information and Communication Technology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Universiti Utara Malaysia Institutional Repository (Universiti Utara Malaysia) (acceptedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Digital Accessibility for Disabilities
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Assistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
- Keywords
- web accessibility, visually impaired users, university websites, accessibility evaluation, accessibility principles, Palestinian universities
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
