Survey of Users with Low Vision Results

Introduction

In March 2013, WebAIM conducted a survey of users with low vision. We received 216 valid responses to this survey. This was the first survey WebAIM has conducted of this population, but we hope to conduct additional surveys of this nature again in the future. If you have recommendations or questions you would like us to ask, please contact us.

A few disclaimers and notices:

• Totals may not equal 100% due to rounding.
• Total responses (n) for each question may not equal 216 due to respondents not answering that particular question.
• The sample was not controlled and may not represent all users with low vision.

Demographics

Mobile Platforms

As with screen reader users, Apple dominates in the mobile space for users with low vision. Those with very poor vision are more likely to use an iOS device than users with less severe vision loss, and they are four times more likely to use an iOS device than an Android phone.

Keyboard Navigation

Keyboard usage is very mixed among respondents. It is of note, however, that 47.5% of respondents always or often use a keyboard for web page navigation. Those with very poor vision are three times more likely to always use a keyboard than users with moderate vision. 66.6% of screen reader users reported always or often using a keyboard, but even 29.5% of those who don't use a screen reader use the keyboard always or often.

Text Sizes

This shouldn't necessarily suggest that web sites need to increase their text size, but it clearly indicates that standard text sizes on the web are not adequate for the vast majority of users with low vision.

Text Resizing Widgets

Opinions of in-page text resizing widgets are very mixed. Respondents who always or often use a keyboard found these widgets much less useful than non-keyboard users. Interestingly, those who use browser text sizing options were twice as likely to find in-page text resizing widgets very useful than those who do not use these browser settings. Those with beginning internet proficiency were much more likely to find them useful than those with advanced internet proficiency.

The majority of respondents would like to see more in-page resizing widgets. Care should be taken, however, in considering the impact of such widgets on other users.

User Controls

Magnification Level

Color Contrast

It is clear from these responses that adequate contrast is important to users with low vision with 91% of respondents saying it is very or somewhat important.

Skip Links

Keyboard users are much more likely to find skip links useful. Respondents with beginner internet proficiency are more likely to find skip links useful than those with advanced proficiency, suggesting that more proficient users may navigate pages using other methods.

Web Accessibility Progress

Social Media Accessibility

Problematic Items

The survey asked respondents to select their most, second most, and third most problematic items from a list. In giving each selected item a weighting, the following chart shows the overall rating of difficulty and frustration for each item.

Problematic items identified are (in order, with most difficult/frustrating first):

1. Complex page layouts
2. Content that becomes unreadable when enlarged
3. Poor contrast
4. CAPTCHA - images presenting text used to verify that you are a human user
5. Pop-up windows or dialog boxes
6. Complex or difficult forms
7. Too many links or navigation items
8. Missing or improper headings
9. Poor keyboard accessibility
10. Complex data tables
11. Lack of skip to main content links

Complex page layouts were by far identified as the most problematic item. While 69% of respondents found skip links very or somewhat useful, lack of skip links was the least problematic item identified. 47.5% of respondents always or often use a keyboard, yet they also found poor keyboard accessibility a low impact issue.

Conclusion

This data shows very diverse demographics and opinions among those with low vision. Respondents used a wide variety of assistive technologies, with most respondents using multiple technologies. For designers and developers, there is no single tool, technique, or approach to meeting the needs of this population. And great care should be taken in implementing solutions for this audience which may impact usability or accessibility for other site users.