CONTEXT/ OBJECTIVE: This study describes research behind two software wizards that help users with physical impairments adjust their keyboard and mouse settings to meet their specific needs. The Keyboard Wizard and Pointing Wizard programs help ensure that keyboard and pointing devices are properly configured for an individual, and reconfigured as the user's needs change. We summarize four effectiveness studies and six usability studies. METHODS: Studies involved participants whose physical impairments affect their ability to use a keyboard and mouse. Effectiveness studies used an A-B-A design, with condition A using default Windows settings and condition B using wizard-recommended settings. Primary data were performance metrics for text entry and target acquisition. Usability studies asked participants to run through each wizard, with no outside guidance. Primary data were completion time, errors made, and user feedback. RESULTS: The wizards were effective at recommending new settings for users who needed them and not recommending them for users who did not. Sensitivity for StickyKeys, pointer speed, and object size algorithms was 100%. Specificity for StickyKeys and pointer speed was over 80%, and 50% for object size. For those who needed settings changes, the recommendations improved performance, with speed increases ranging from 9 to 59%. Accuracy improved significantly with the wizard recommendations, eliminating up to 100% of errors. Users ran through the current wizard software in less than 6 minutes. Ease-of-use rating averaged over 4.5 on a scale of 1 to 5. CONCLUSION: The wizards are a simple yet effective way of adjusting Windows to accommodate physical impairments.
CONTEXT/ OBJECTIVE: This study describes research behind two software wizards that help users with physical impairments adjust their keyboard and mouse settings to meet their specific needs. The Keyboard Wizard and Pointing Wizard programs help ensure that keyboard and pointing devices are properly configured for an individual, and reconfigured as the user's needs change. We summarize four effectiveness studies and six usability studies. METHODS: Studies involved participants whose physical impairments affect their ability to use a keyboard and mouse. Effectiveness studies used an A-B-A design, with condition A using default Windows settings and condition B using wizard-recommended settings. Primary data were performance metrics for text entry and target acquisition. Usability studies asked participants to run through each wizard, with no outside guidance. Primary data were completion time, errors made, and user feedback. RESULTS: The wizards were effective at recommending new settings for users who needed them and not recommending them for users who did not. Sensitivity for StickyKeys, pointer speed, and object size algorithms was 100%. Specificity for StickyKeys and pointer speed was over 80%, and 50% for object size. For those who needed settings changes, the recommendations improved performance, with speed increases ranging from 9 to 59%. Accuracy improved significantly with the wizard recommendations, eliminating up to 100% of errors. Users ran through the current wizard software in less than 6 minutes. Ease-of-use rating averaged over 4.5 on a scale of 1 to 5. CONCLUSION: The wizards are a simple yet effective way of adjusting Windows to accommodate physical impairments.
Authors: Mari-Lynn Drainoni; Bethlyn Houlihan; Steve Williams; Mark Vedrani; David Esch; Elizabeth Lee-Hood; Cheryl Weiner Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2004-11 Impact factor: 3.966