Inclusive Writing

Part of the Human–Computer Interaction Series book series (HCIS)


This chapter introduces inclusive writing and how to incorporate it into research. We give general guidelines on language choice and suggestions on writing for and about specific user groups. However, language is constantly evolving. Preferred language for writing about people with disabilities changes over time, and with context, and can be a source of disagreement even within a user group. The inclusive writing approach proposed here covers three key points: use the included terminology and considerations as a starting point; verify language choices and other assumptions through feedback with participants; and strive for respect in all research interactions. The chapter also explores how careful thinking about language can make an entire research project more accessible and inclusive.


  1. Cavender A, Trewin S, Hanson VL (2008) General writing guidelines for technology and people with disabilities. SIGACCESS Access Comput 92:17–22. Scholar
  2. Dunn DS, Andrews E (2015) Person-first and identity-first language: developing psychologists’ cultural competence using disability language. Am Psychol 70:255–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Foreman P (2005) Language and disability. J Intellect Dev Disabil 30(1):57–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Gernsbacher MA et al (2016) Special needs’ is an ineffective euphemism. Cogn Res Princ Implic 1:29 (PMC. Web. 22 June 2018)Google Scholar
  5. Hanson VL, Cavender A, Trewin S (2015) Writing about accessibility. Interactions 22(6):62–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hehir T, Grindal T, Freeman B, Lamoreau R, Borquaye Y, Burke S (2016) A summary of the evidence on inclusive education. ABT Associates Accessed 1 July 2018
  7. Kenny L, Hattersley C, Molins B, Buckley C, Povey C, Pellicano E (2016) Which terms should be used to describe autism? Perspectives from the UK autism community. Autism 20(4):442–462. The National Autistic SocietyCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kirkpatrick A, O’Connor J, Cooper M (2018) Web content accessibility guidelines (WCAG) 2.1. W3C Recommendation 5 June 2018. Accessed 1 July 2018
  9. Lazar J, Feng JH, Hochheiser H (2017) Research methods in human-computer interaction, 2nd edn. Morgan Kaufmann, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  10. Loftus E, Palmer J (1974) Reconstruction of automobile destruction: an example of the interaction between language and memory. J Verbal Learn Verbal Behav 13:585–589CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. National Center on Disability and Journalism (2018) Disability language style guide. Accessed 2 July 2018
  12. Seeman L, Cooper M (2015) Cognitive accessibility user research. W3C First Public Working Draft 15 January 2015 Accessed 1 July 2018
  13. Sears A, Hanson VL (2011) Representing users in accessibility research. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (CHI ‘11). ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp 2235–2238.
  14. Smith M, Sharit J, Czaja S (1999) Aging, motor control, and the performance of computer mouse tasks. Hum Factors 41(3):389–396. Scholar
  15. Trewin S, Richards JT, Hanson VL, Sloan D, John BE, Swart C, Thomas JC (2012) Understanding the role of age and fluid intelligence in information search. In: Proceedings of the 14th international ACM SIGACCESS conference on computers and accessibility (ASSETS ‘12). ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp 119–126.
  16. UN General Assembly (2007) Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities: resolution/adopted by the General Assembly, 24 Jan 2007, A/RES/61/106. Available at Accessed 3 July 2018
  17. United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division (2015) World population ageing 2015 (ST/ESA/SER.A/390)Google Scholar
  18. US Census Bureau (2016) 2016 American community survey 1-year estimates. Accessed 31 Aug 2018
  19. White K, Abou-Zahra S, Henry SL (2016) Tips for getting started writing for web accessibility. Available at Accessed 31 Aug 2018
  20. Yesilada Y, Brajnik G, Vigo M, Harper, S (2012) Understanding web accessibility and its drivers. In: Proceedings of the international cross-disciplinary conference on web accessibility (W4A ‘12). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 19, 9 pp.

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.IBM ResearchClevelandUSA
  2. 2.GoogleMountain ViewUSA
  3. 3.IBM ResearchLittletonUSA
  4. 4.IBM ResearchYorktown HeightsUSA

Personalised recommendations