Differences in vision performance in different scenarios and implications for design.
Change log
Authors
Goodman-Deane, Joy
Latham, Keziah
Price, Holly
Tenneti, Raji
Abstract
To design accessibly, designers need good, relevant population data on visual abilities. However, currently available data often focuses on clinical vision measures that are not entirely relevant to everyday product use. This paper presents data from a pilot survey of 362 participants in the UK, covering a range of vision measures of particular relevance to product design. The results from the different measures are compared, and recommendations are given for relative text sizes to use in different situations. The results indicate that text needs to be 17-18% larger for comfortable rather than perceived threshold viewing, and a further 20% larger when users are expected to wear their everyday vision setup rather than specific reading aids.
Description
Keywords
Inclusive design, Product design, Text size, Visual ability, Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Ergonomics, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Pilot Projects, Surveys and Questionnaires, Task Performance and Analysis, United Kingdom, Vision, Ocular, Visual Field Tests, Visual Perception, Young Adult
Journal Title
Appl Ergon
Conference Name
Journal ISSN
0003-6870
1872-9126
1872-9126
Volume Title
55
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Publisher DOI
Sponsorship
EPSRC (via University of Sheffield) (URMS 125545)
Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EP/D079322/1)
Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EP/D079322/1)
The survey was funded by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) through the i~design 3 grant (Award Number: RG45089). The survey itself was conducted by the National Centre for Social Research under the direction of the research team. As well as the authors of this paper, several others made substantial contributions to the design and analysis of this survey, including Felicia Huppert, Pat Langdon, Kai Ruggeri, Eddy Elton, Jose Liht and John Ryan. Further analysis was funded by EPSRC through the KT-EQUAL project (grant number EP/G030898/2).