Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Understanding User Centred Design (UCD) for People with Special Needs

  • Conference paper
Computers Helping People with Special Needs (ICCHP 2008)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 5105))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

“User centred design” (UCD) has become a central, largely unquestioned, tenet of good practice for the design of interactive systems. With the increasing recognition of the importance of special needs in influencing design, UCD needs to be re-examined, in particular to be clear about the difference between using its methods, which may not suit special needs, and achieving its objectives. This paper introduces a simple two-category classification of special needs, to which UCD applies very differently and which are heavily affected by developments in technology; in other words, the role of UCD, particularly with respect to special needs, will continue to change and demand close scrutiny.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Anderson, J.R., Lebiere, C.: The Atomic Components of Thought. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Beveridge, M., Crerar, A.: A multimedia presentation system for the remediation of sentence processing deficits. In: Proceedings of INTERACT 1999, pp. 272–280 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Buxton, B.: Sketching the user experience. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Cairns, P.: HCI... not as it should be: Inferential statistics in HCI research. In: Ball, L.J., Sasse, M.A., Sas, C. (eds.) HCI 2007, vol. 1, pp. 195–201 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Card, S.K., Moran, T.P., Newell, A.: The Psychology of Human-Computer Interaction. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale (1983)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Chandrashekar, S., Stockman, T., Fels, D., Benedyk, R.: Using think aloud protocol with blind users: A case for inclusive usability evaluation methods. In: Assets 2006: Proceedings of the 8th international ACM SIGACCESS conference on Computers and Accessibility, pp. 251–252. ACM, New York (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Chen, M.K.: Rationalization and cognitive dissonance: Do choices affect or reflect preferences? Technical report, Yale School of Management (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Fogg, B.J.: Persuasive technology. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Gould, J.D., Lewis, C.: Designing for usability—key principles and what designers think. In: CHI 1983: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 50–53. ACM, New York (1983)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. Gould, J.D., Lewis, C.: Designing for usability: Key principles and what designers think. Communications of the ACM 28(3), 300–311 (1985)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Gray, W.D., Salzman, M.C.: Damaged merchandise? A review of experiments that compare usability evaluation methods. Human-Computer Interaction 13(3), 203–261 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Gray, W.D., Salzman, M.C.: Repairing damaged merchandise: A rejoinder. Human-Computer Interaction 13(3), 325–335 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Hansen, W.J.: User engineering principles for interactive systems. In: AFIPS Conference Proceedings, vol. 39, pp. 523–532 (1971)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Holzinger, A., Sammer, P., Hofmann-Wellenhof, R.: Mobile computer in medicine: Designing mobile questionairres for elderly and partially sighted people. In: Miesenberger, K., Klaus, J., Zagler, W., Karshmer, A.I. (eds.) ICCHP 2006. LNCS, vol. 4061, pp. 732–739. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. Institute for Safe Medication Practice Canada. Fluorouracil Incident Root Cause Analysis (2007), www.cancerboard.ab.ca/NR/rdonlyres/D92D86F9-9880-4D8A-819C-281231CA2A38/0/IncidentReportUE.pdf

  16. International conference on computers helping people with special needs conference series. LNCS, vol. 2398, 3118, 4061, etc. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  17. John, B.E., Salvucci, D.D.: Multi-purpose prototypes for assessing user interfaces in pervasive computing systems. IEEE Pervasive Computing 4(4), 27–34 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Jokela, T., Lalli, T.: Usability and CMMI: Does a higher maturity level in product development mean better usability? In: CHI 2003 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems, pp. 1010–1011. ACM, New York (2003)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  19. Kruger, J., Dunning, D.: Unskilled and unaware of it: How difficulties in recognizing one’s own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 77, 1121–1134 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Lacaze, X., Palanque, P., Navarre, D., Bastide, R.: Performance evaluation as a tool for quantitative assessment of complexity of interactive systems. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Workshop on Interactive Systems, Design, Specification, and Verification (DSVIS), vol. 2545, pp. 208–222. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  21. Landauer, T.: The Trouble with Computers. MIT Press, Cambridge (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  22. MacKenzie, I.S.: Movement time prediction in human-computer interfaces. In: Baecker, R.M., Buxton, W.A.S., Grudin, J., Greenberg, S. (eds.) Readings in human-computer interaction, pp. 483–493. Kaufmann, San Francisco (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Newman, W., Sproull, R.: Principles of Interactive Computer Graphics, 2nd edn. Mcgraw-Hill, New York (1979)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Nielsen, J.: Finding usability problems through heuristic evaluation. In: Proceedings ACM CHI 1992, pp. 373–380 (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Norman, D.A., Draper, S.W.: User Centered System Design; New Perspectives on Human-Computer Interaction. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Mahwah (1986)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Petrie, H., Hamilton, F., King, N., Pavan, P.: Remote usability evaluations with disabled people. In: Proceedings of ACM CHI 2006, pp. 1133–1141 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Ramey, J., Boren, T., Cuddihy, E., Dumas, J., Guan, Z., van den Haak, M.J., Jong, M.D.T.D.: Does think aloud work? How do we know? In: CHI 2006 extended abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 45–48. ACM, New York (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  28. Rosson, M.B., Carroll, J.M.: Usability engineering: Scenario-based development of human-computer interaction. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Tavris, C., Aronson, E.: Mistakes were made. Harcourt (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Thimbleby, H.: Press On: Principles of interaction programming. MIT Press, Boston (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Thimbleby, H.: User-centered methods are insufficient for safety critical systems. In: Holzinger, A. (ed.) USAB 2007. LNCS, vol. 4799, pp. 1–20. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  32. Thimbleby, H., Addison, M.A.: Intelligent adaptive assistance and its automatic generation. Interacting with Computers 8(1), 51–68 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Thimbleby, H., Thimbleby, W.: Internalist and externalist HCI. In: BCS HCI 2007, vol. 2, pp. 111–114 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Wharton, C., Rieman, J., Lewis, C., Polson, P.: The cognitive walkthrough method: A practictioner’s guide. In: Nielsen, J., Mack, R.L. (eds.) Usability Inspection Methods (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Widdup, E.: We told T5 bosses the system was a farce... they ignored us. London Evening Standard 9, 17 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Wixon, D.R.: Evaluating usability methods: Why the current literature fails the practitioner. Interactions 10(4), 28–34 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Future Interaction Technology Laboratory (FIT Lab), University of Swansea, Wales,  

    Harold Thimbleby

Authors
  1. Harold Thimbleby
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Klaus Miesenberger Joachim Klaus Wolfgang Zagler Arthur Karshmer

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2008 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Thimbleby, H. (2008). Understanding User Centred Design (UCD) for People with Special Needs. In: Miesenberger, K., Klaus, J., Zagler, W., Karshmer, A. (eds) Computers Helping People with Special Needs. ICCHP 2008. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 5105. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-70540-6_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-70540-6_1

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-70539-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-70540-6

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation