Re: Ethics of user testing and people with cognitive disabilities

I should also mention that she was very happy to help me/us in this way of
allowing others to begin to understand what works on the web for her and
what doesn't, and she would be very pleased if it helped others with
similar disabilities... and said she would love to help anytime.

Cheers,
David MacDonald



*Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.*
Tel:  613.235.4902

LinkedIn
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100>

twitter.com/davidmacd

GitHub <https://github.com/DavidMacDonald>

www.Can-Adapt.com <http://www.can-adapt.com/>



*  Adapting the web to all users*
*            Including those with disabilities*

If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy
<http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html>

On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 11:11 AM, David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>
wrote:

> In the testing case I posted, this was a person with whom our family has a
> long standing relationship, who has no legal guardian, who can decide for
> herself whether she wants to participate or not, and who gave permission
> for me to test, understood what I was doing and that I would share the
> results of the test..
>
> Cheers,
> David MacDonald
>
>
>
> *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.*
> Tel:  613.235.4902
>
> LinkedIn
> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100>
>
> twitter.com/davidmacd
>
> GitHub <https://github.com/DavidMacDonald>
>
> www.Can-Adapt.com <http://www.can-adapt.com/>
>
>
>
> *  Adapting the web to all users*
> *            Including those with disabilities*
>
> If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy
> <http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html>
>
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 9:15 AM, lisa.seeman <lisa.seeman@zoho.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Josh
>>
>> This is a great thread. I think an issue paper on user testing for COGA
>> use groups would be a good idea. Not having any user testing with people
>> with cognitive disabilities might have the result that they will never have
>> fully useable services.
>>
>> I have not done a lot of testing, but a technique I have used is to avoid
>> any language that suggests the user fails. For example, "can you see how to
>> buy shoes" becomes "did the designer make it clear how to buy shoes". In
>> other words, the implication is the design is at fault not the user.
>> Limiting the amount of fail question to two, however they have been
>> rephrased, is probably a good idea as well. I would always end with asking
>> them to do tasks they can manage.
>>
>> Of course, informed consent is always a requirement.
>>
>> All the best
>> Lisa
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---- On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 13:14:52 +0300 *<josh@interaccess.ie
>> <josh@interaccess.ie>>* wrote ----
>>
>> [Chair hat off]
>>
>> In a previous thread the issue of user testing with people with cognitive
>> impairments has been brought up. I thought this could be a good time to
>> share some of my own thoughts in this area. As some of you may know, I
>> ran a user testing lab in the National Council for the Blind of Ireland for
>> around 10 years. During that time I ran user tests with a wide range of
>> users, not just those who are blind/VIP. In that time I did a small amount
>> of testing with people with cognitive impairments, mental health issues
>> etc. I found this a difficult group to test with due to my own concern
>> about the ethics of doing so properly.
>>
>> One very strong reservation I have about this whole area is simple. Does
>> the user have the ability the objectively separate the tasks they are
>> asked to perform in a test (and the natural success/failure when trying to
>> completing these tasks) from their overall 'sense of self'? What I mean is
>> that will the user be able to realise that their actions are being
>> objectively observed without any 'judgement' on their performance?
>>
>>  I would hate to think that a user would come away from a user test,
>> where many tasks were failed (which is great usability information) but
>> feeling worse about themselves, or as if _they_ were some kind of failure. In
>> short, I think user testing is a bit of a performance, within an
>> utterly contrived environment. Some people take to this well, others don't.
>>
>> This is a very thorny issue but one I want to flag. I don't think testing
>> should take place at all without a strong framework about how to deal with
>> these sensitive situations. Sometimes you may have to make a call not to
>> test, if it isn't in the best interest of the user test participant, even
>> if they may be a perfect candidate for 'rich data'. I've made this call not
>> to test in the past, and my overall take away was that I am largely
>> uncomfortable doing this kind of testing, unless I'm sure it is in the
>> participants best interest, separately from whatever the secondary need of
>> a project/client is.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> Josh
>>
>>
>>
>>
>