Toward a Combined Method for Evaluation of Web Accessibility

  • Patricia Acosta-VargasEmail author
  • Sergio Luján-Mora
  • Tania Acosta
  • Luis Salvador-Ullauri
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 721)


This study describes the problems of web accessibility, especially for people with disabilities, as external conditions can distort user behavior and limit the data that can be obtained. Several studies recommend combining some methods with each other to achieve better results. This article proposes a combined approach, with the application of automatic and heuristic tools to make websites more accessible. In this study, we apply the Web Site Accessibility Assessment Methodology (WCAG-EM) considered in the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 (WCAG 2.0). From the results, we conclude that most tested websites can achieve an acceptable level of compliance. We propose that future work can focus on optimizing this combined approach, also this study can serve as a guide to help develop more inclusive websites.


Accessibility Automatics tools Combined method Evaluation Heuristics People with disabilities WCAG-EM WCAG 2.0 W3C Website 


  1. 1.
    Batanero, C., Karhu, M., Holvikivi, J., Oton, S., Amado-Salvatierra, H.R.: A method to evaluate accessibility in e-learning education systems. In: 14th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies, pp. 556–560 (2014)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bevan, N.: How you could benefit from using ISO standards. In: Extended Abstracts of the 32nd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 2503–2504 (2014)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brajnik, G.: A comparative test of web accessibility evaluation methods. In: 10th International ACM Special Interest Group on Accessible Computing, pp. 113–120 (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Martín, E., Haya, P.A., Carro, R.M.: Adaptation technologies to support daily living for all. In: User Modeling and Adaptation for Daily Routines, pp. 1–21. Springer (2013)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Acosta-Vargas, P., Luján-Mora, S., Salvador-Ullauri, L.: Evaluation of the web accessibility of higher-education websites. In: 15th IEEE International Conference on Information Technology Based Higher Education and Training (ITHET), pp. 1–6 (2016)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Acosta-Vargas, P., Luján-Mora, S., Salvador-Ullauri, L.: Web accessibility polices of higher education institutions. In: 16th IEEE International Conference on Information Technology Based Higher Education and Training (ITHET) (2017)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Carreras, O.: Validators and tools for accessibility and usability consultancies. Accessed: 20 Aug 2017
  8. 8.
    Cockton, G., Woolrych, A.: Understanding inspection methods: lessons from an assessment of heuristic evaluation. In: People and Computers XV Interaction without Frontiers, pp. 171–191. Springer (2001)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Debevc, M., Kozuh, I., Hauptman, S., Klembas, A., Lapuh, J.B., Holzinger, A.: Using WCAG 2.0 and heuristic evaluation to evaluate accessibility in educational web based pages. In: International Workshop on Learning Technology for Education in Cloud, pp. 197–207. Springer (2015)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hassan, Y., Martín, F.J.: Web site heuristic evaluation guide. Accessed: 10 Aug 2017
  11. 11.
    International Standard Organization, ISO/IEC 24751-3:2008: Information Technology - Individualized Adaptability and Accessibility in E-learning, Education and Training - Part 3: “Access for All” Digital Resource Description (2008)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Authors: Details omitted for double-blind, Fourth Author (2017)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kreijns, C.J., Kirschner, P.A., Jochems, W.: The sociability of computer-supported collaborative learning environments. Educ. Technol. Soc. 5, 8–22 (2002)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Luján-Mora, S.: Accesibilidad web. Accessed: 16 Oct 2017
  15. 15.
    Luján-Mora, S., Masri, F.: Evaluation of web accessibility: a combined method. In: Information Systems Research and Exploring Social Artifacts: Approaches and Methodologies, Information Science Reference, pp. 314–331 (2002)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mascaraque, E.S.: Herramientas para la evaluación de la accesibilidad Web [tools for the evaluation of web accessibility]. Documentación de las Ciencias de la Información 32, 245–266 (2009)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Paddison, C., Englefield, P.: Applying heuristics to perform a rigorous accessibility inspection in a commercial context. In: ACM International Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques, Computers and the Physically Handicapped No. 73–74, pp. 126–133 (2003)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rayan, A., Dadoul, A.M., Jabareen, H., Sulieman, Z., Alzayyat, A., Baker, O.: Internet use among university students in south west bank: prevalence, advantages and disadvantages, and association with psychological health. Int. J. Ment. Health Addict. 15(1), 118–129 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    WebAIM, Web Accessibility in Mind. Checklist. Accessed: 16 Oct 2017
  20. 20.
    W3C, Website Accessibility Conformance Evaluation Methodology (WCAG-EM) 1.0., W3C Working Group Note, 10 July 2014. Accessed: 16 Oct 2017
  21. 21.
    World Wide Web Consortium, W3C: Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1. Accessed: 16 Oct 2017
  22. 22.
    World Wide Web Consortium, W3C: Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0. Accessed: 16 Oct 2017
  23. 23.
    Rocha, Á.: Framework for a global quality evaluation of a website. Online Inf. Rev. 36(3), 374–382 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Patricia Acosta-Vargas
    • 1
    Email author
  • Sergio Luján-Mora
    • 2
  • Tania Acosta
    • 3
  • Luis Salvador-Ullauri
    • 3
  1. 1.Universidad de Las Américas-UDLAQuitoEcuador
  2. 2.University of AlicanteAlicanteSpain
  3. 3.Escuela Politécnica NacionalQuitoEcuador

Personalised recommendations