ONLINE MUSIC STORE ACCESSIBILITY

An Interactive Qualifying Project Report

Submitted to the Faculty

of the

WORCESTER POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE

in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the

Degree of Bachelor of Science

by Todor

Kiryazov

____________________________

Date:

____________________________

____________________________

Professor Eleanor T. Loiacono, Major Advisor

____________________________

Professor Soussan Djamasbi, Co-Advisor

1
 Table of Contents

Acknowledgements...................................................................................................................................2
1. Introduction.............................................................................................................................................3
2. Background & Research......................................................................................................................6
2.1 Visual Disabilities and the Internet...........................................................................................6
2.1.1 Low Vision...............................................................................................................................7
2.1.2 Color Blindness......................................................................................................................7
2.1.3 Blindness..................................................................................................................................7
2.2 Accessibility Technologies for Blind and Low-Vision Users...........................................7
2.3 Internet Barriers Faced by People with Disabilities............................................................9
2.4 Standards and Policies................................................................................................................10
2.4.1 The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)...................................................................10
2.4.2 Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)................................................................................11
2.4.3 The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG)..............................................12
2.4.4 Air Carrier Access Act.......................................................................................................14
2.4.5 The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)..............................................................14
2.4.6 Section 508............................................................................................................................15
2.5 Lawsuits.........................................................................................................................................18
2.6 The Digital Music Industry.......................................................................................................19
2.7 The Audio Books Industry........................................................................................................20
2.7.1 Audible.com..........................................................................................................................22
2.7.2 iTunes.....................................................................................................................................23
2.7.3 Yahoo! Music Unlimited...................................................................................................24
2.7.4 Rhapsody................................................................................................................................25
2.7.5 Napster....................................................................................................................................26
2.7.6 Barnes & Noble and Amazon.com.................................................................................27
3. Problem Research Question.............................................................................................................29
4. Methodology........................................................................................................................................30
4.1 Qualitative Data............................................................................................................................30
4.1.1 Participants............................................................................................................................30
4.1.2 Procedure...............................................................................................................................31
4.1.3 Task..........................................................................................................................................34
4.1.4 Measurements.......................................................................................................................36
4.2 Quantitative Data.........................................................................................................................38
5. Results....................................................................................................................................................40
6. Discussion.............................................................................................................................................44
7. Limitations and Future Research....................................................................................................48
8. Conclusion............................................................................................................................................49
References..................................................................................................................................................50
Glossary......................................................................................................................................................53
Appendix A: User Feedback.................................................................................................................54
Appendix B: Comparison between WCAG and Section 508....................................................57
Appendix C: iTunes Pearson Correlation Tests..............................................................................60
Appendix D: Amazon.com Pearson Correlation Tests.................................................................62
Appendix E: Demographic Results....................................................................................................64
Appendix F: Results from Accessibility Testing using WebXACT..........................................65
Appendix G: Screenshots of Survey..................................................................................................72
Appendix H: Recording Industry Association of America Year-End Statistics (2005)......81
2
Acknowledgements

I would like to take this opportunity to thank WPI, the Management Department

and specifically, Professor Eleanor Loiacono and Professor Soussan Djamasbi for

sponsoring and advising this project. Their help and guidance throughout the project

development is greatly appreciated.

Furthermore, I would also like to thank Jan Seymour-Ford of the Perkins School

for the Blind for recruiting for participants at the school, as well as all survey

participants for their input and feedback.

2
1. Introduction

The Internet has established itself as one of the most frequently used means of

exchanging information among people. Whether it is used for keeping in touch, doing

business, research, shopping or entertainment, the Internet has become the most pervasive

global social infrastructure. The electronic data transmission breaks the distance barrier.

Nowadays, there is a lot of business going on exclusively online. Paperless billing, for

example, might become a regular practice for banks and other institutions.

Because of its ubiquitous presence in every area of human activity especially

today and in the future, it is vital that everyone has the ability to access the Internet.

Furthermore, everyone should be able to browse the same websites and have the

opportunity for equal user experience in the Internet. In other words, the Internet should

be usable by everyone.

Accessibility is a category of usability (Accessibility Definition, 2007). In this

light, a web page that is not usable by someone is not accessible to that person.

Accessible websites are those that give users with and without disabilities equal

opportunity to perceive, understand, navigate and interact (W3C, 2007a) with the

information they contain. The Internet relies heavily on text and image content as a

primary way of retrieving and delivering information. This graphic user interface (GUI)

method of providing access to the web, however, is not particularly suited for a large

segment of the user population. People with sensory disabilities have been isolated from

the Internet because many websites are not designed to fit their needs. Through the use of

assistive technologies, information has been made available for blind and low-vision

3
users. Most of todays websites, however, do not support these technologies and are

hence inaccessible.

The 2005 American Community Survey of the US Census Bureau shows that

approximately 13 million in the U. S. (4% of the U.S. population (US Census, 2007)) and

180 million people worldwide (WHO, 2004) have some kind of a sensory disability. The

population becomes even larger when we include people with reduced sense of

perception.

Vision loss is a major public health issue and will demand even more attention as

our population continues to age. According to the Lighthouse National Survey on Vision

Loss, 13.5 million people over the age of 45 have some kind of impaired vision. In 2010,

when the last baby boomers will be 45, the figure will grow to 20 million. For example,

low vision the third age generation and people who have to wear corrective lenses or

intraocular lens implants. The elderly are the largest and fastest growing population

segment of the world. With the advance in medicine and the decreased mortality rate, in

2050 seniors (age 65+) will make up 21% of the world population.

Even though discussions and attempts to improve accessibility for the disabled

did not start until recent years, there is no doubt that initial steps have been taken at

developing the legislature and regulations necessary. Progress has also been made within

organizations such as the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C).

People with impaired vision are heavily dependant on hearing to be aware of the

environment and their surroundings. Through voice and audio they also perceive the

largest amount of knowledge. Audio books and music in general are the major sources of

information and entertainment for the blind.

4
 With the looming digitalization of multi media, audio online is becoming more

and more frequently used. This further raises the question of how and what kind of access

will be provided to blind and low vision users, who want to use the new technology. This

research discusses the accessibility of Internet audio providers for blind and low-vision

users.

5
2. Background & Research

The major focus of this research is web accessibility for blind and low-vision

users. To better understand the magnitude and depth of the study, it is essential to gather

some background information about the types of visual disabilities, the technology that

exists for visually disabled users and some of the legislature that is associated with the

subject.

2.1 Visual Disabilities and the Internet

Even though the Internet now provides a lot more multimedia than at its

inception, it is still mainly a text-based means of delivering information to the user. That

is why, of all disability communities that use the Internet, people with visual disabilities

have the most limited accessibility to it.

The population of blind and visually impaired Internet users is growing rapidly.

According to the American Foundation for the Blind, a minimal estimate is that there are

1.5 million visually impaired computer users, including those who are blind. The total

number of people ages 15 and older with any "limitation in seeing", who report they have

access to the Internet is just over 1.5 million (1,549,000). The number of people ages 15

and older, with a limitation in seeing, who use a computer regularly is a bit under one

million (979,000). Of those, about 196,000 people with a "severe" limitation in seeing

have access to the Internet, and about 102,000 persons with a severe limitation in seeing

use a computer on a regular basis. (Gerber, 2004)

To better understand the population it is essential to identify the common types of

visual disabilities: low vision, color blindness and total blindness. (Paciello, 2000)

6
 2.1.1 Low Vision

Anyone with non-correctable reduced vision is regarded as visually impaired.

People with low vision are not blind. They have useful vision and can improve it using

visual devices. The impairment levels range from mild to severe.

2.1.2 Color Blindness

Roughly one in every 20 people has some kind of color vision disability. They

have difficulty recognizing certain pairs of colors. Deuteranomaly is the most widespread

kind of color blindness. It affects about 5% of the world male population and is

associated with mild red-green hue discrimination. Protanomaly is a color vision defect,

which results in poor red-green hue discrimination. It is inherited, gender-specific, and

present in 1% of all males. Tritanomaly is the rarest, color blindness affecting blue-

yellow hue discrimination (Cassin, 1990).

2.1.3 Blindness

In the United States, anybody whose vision cannot be improved to better than

20/200, or whose diameter is 20 degrees or less of visual field remaining, is legally blind.

Anyone who has no light perception and is completely sightless is considered blind.

Blindness can be caused by many diseases such as cataract, cerebral palsy, diabetes,

glaucoma and sclerosis. (Paciello, 2000)

2.2 Accessibility Technologies for Blind and Low-Vision Users

There are numerous applications available that are designed to enable and

improve the computer use and Internet experience of people with visual disabilities.

7
Because people have different needs, and different needs require different tools, there are

many developments and types of accessibility tools. The goal in the end is to provide

equal access to the same information no matter if one has a disability or not. Access

technologies can be divided into two groups: technologies for input and technologies for

output.

Currently, the most popular technology for input is speech recognition. Speech

recognition is usually a combination of a piece of software and an input device

(microphone or headset) that allows the user to say commands that the software translates

into system actions. It can also be used as a Dictaphone to create new text.

Output technologies include:

Screen magnifier a piece of software that zooms in on the computer screen to

provide larger text and images. Most graphic user interface (GUI) operating
systems (OS) nowadays have an embedded screen magnifier, which enlarges the
selected area of the screen making the information easier to perceive (University
of Leicester, 2007)

Figure 1 Screen Magnifier

8
 Braille display a piece of hardware that uses popup pins to display Braille
symbols. As displayed in Figure 2, Braille displays raise the Braille letters with
retractable dots and is usually 20 to 80 characters long

Figure 2 Braille Display

Screen reader a piece of software that uses synthetic voice to read text and
computer commands back to the user.

Of the several screen reader application packages available on the market, JAWS for

Windows and Window-Eyes are the most common. A product evaluation executed and

published by the American Foundation for the Blind compared and rated the two

applications based on several criteria. Each program was tested in basic performance with

Microsoft Word and Corel WordPrefect, Microsoft Internet Explorer, FileMaker Pro from

Apple, Microsoft Visual Basic and others. Based on the conclusions, JAWS for Windows

provides fast and easy access to programs like Word and Internet Explorer and requires

additional configurations and installation of scripts for less commonly used software

applications. JAWS for Windows is the most widely used Windows screen reader

(Earl, C., et. al. 2000).

2.3 Internet Barriers Faced by People with Disabilities

Poorly designed websites create additional barriers for people with visual

disabilities the way inadequately designed buildings prevent some from entering. Web

9
developers often do not realize how simple features built into a web pages source code

can greatly help someone who cannot see a computer monitor.

As high speed Internet becomes more widespread in the U.S. and around the globe,

Web designers are tempted to make the best use of the higher bandwidth and deliver

multi- media content through the Internet. With this the line between software

applications and web pages becomes ambiguous. For example, the CNET website

(CNET, 2007) combines of text, graphics, Flash animation, and video interviews. It is

essential that every component be coded in a way that allows screen reader applications

to read the content. For the same reason, Flash animation or online video should have

captions. Overall, the font and background colors should have an acceptable contrast

difference and text should be sufficiently large. Detailed rules are listed in the WCAG.

2.4 Standards and Policies

The recent growth and expansion of the use of the Internet as a completely

independent medium for exchange of information has raised the need for standardization

and unification. Its virtual existence has also brought up interesting issues regarding the

application of existing laws and policies in this new environment and the importance of

all members of society, including people with disabilities, being able to get to this

information. There is a growing number of national and global laws and regulations that

address accessibility on the Internet.

2.4.1 The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)

The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) is the main international standards

organization for the World Wide Web. It was founded in 1994 to improve the World

10
Wide Web by publishing Web standards and guidelines called W3C Recommendations

(W3C, 2007). It is responsible for the development of uniform protocols to assure the

interoperability of the Internet. It is structured as a consortium. The consortium consists

of member organizations that maintain full-time staff for the purpose of working together

in the development of standards for the World Wide Web. As of December 2006, the

W3C had 429 members and was open for new organizations to join. Other W3C activities

include education and outreach, software development and discussions about the Web.

The Consortium is administered by the MIT Computer Science and Artificial

Intelligence Laboratory (CSAIL) in the USA, the European Research Consortium for

Informatics and Mathematics (ERCIM) (in Sophia Antipolis, France), and Keio

University (in Japan). There are also offices in fifteen regions around the world. (W3C.

2007.)

2.4.2 Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)

The W3C started the Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) as an effort to improve

the accessibility of the World Wide Web for people with physical disabilities who require

special devices and software to access the Web. The WAI has developed a number of

guidelines that can help to make Web sites more accessible. It also ensures that the

current core technologies of the Internet support accessibility, designs evaluation and

repair tools for accessibility and coordinates with research and development the future

effects on accessibility of the Web. (WAI Mission and Organization, 2007)

11
2.4.3 The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG)

Of the guidelines the WAI developed, the WCAG are generally accepted as the

classic guidelines on creating websites accessible for everyone. The WAI published the

first Version (Version 1.0) of the WCAG in 1999. Since 2003, the WAI has been working

on a second Version (Version 2.0) whose first working draft was published in April 2006.

The guidelines are organized in a checklist/checkpoint format. Checkpoints are

prioritized in three levels (WCAG, 2007). According to the document priorities are

described as follows:

Priority 1: A Web content developer must satisfy this checkpoint.

Otherwise, one or more groups will find it impossible to access
information in the document. Satisfying this checkpoint is a basic
requirement for some groups to be able to use Web documents.

Priority 2: A Web content developer should satisfy this checkpoint.

Otherwise, one or more groups will find it difficult to access information
in the document. Satisfying this checkpoint will remove significant
barriers to accessing Web documents.

Priority 3: A Web content developer may address this checkpoint.

Otherwise, one or more groups will find it somewhat difficult to access
information in the document. Satisfying this checkpoint will improve
access to Web documents.

A complete set of the new guidelines can be found at:

http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/

There have been a number of improvements over the first version. Some of these

improvements include the elimination of outdated guidelines and adding real world

techniques. The guidelines removed include:

1.5 - Provide equivalent text links for links within client-side image maps

5.6 - Provide abbreviations for table header labels, if you use these

12
 9.5 - Use accesskeys (keyboard shortcuts) for important links

10.3 - Don't use tables with more than one column for layout

10.4 - Make sure form fields aren't empty by default

10.5 - Ensure different links have non-link text between them

The WCAG 2.0 guidelines include real world techniques that are useful

recommendations to web developers, such as:

How to open a link in a new window using unobtrusive JavaScript

Displaying decorative images through CSS

Combining text and its adjacent image in the same link

Providing a heading at the beginning of each section on the page

A number of useful guidelines have been removed, however, along with the new

editions to Version 2.0 of the WCAG. Some of those removed are:

3.1 - Avoid embedding text within images.

3.2 - Create documents that validate.

3.3 - Use CSS and not tables for layout.

3.4 - Ensure text is resizable.

12.3 - Divide large blocks of information into more manageable groups

where natural and appropriate.

13.8 - Place distinguishing information at the beginning of headings,

paragraphs, lists, etc.

14.1 - Use clear and simple language.

Despite the benefits of the WCAG there are some disadvantages that still need to

be addressed. One of the main weaknesses of the guidelines is that they are long and

13
difficult to use which discourages web developers from referring to them. They also have

a lot of jargon, which often makes them hard to understand. Furthermore, the text is

abounding with hyperlinks, which make reading the document very tedious. The

complete documentation is over 300 pages long, and could be quite intimidating for a

web designer to refer to. Moreover, Version 1.0 of the WCAG had to be quickly replaced

with a newer one because the former had a major emphasis on technology. Information

technology, however, develops quite rapidly. That is why Version 2.0 is technology

neutral. This, however, has made the actual guidelines very vague, because everything is

referred to in generic terms.

2.4.4 Air Carrier Access Act

In 1990 The Department of Transportation issued a set of rules that described

passenger rights and air carriers obligations. It was called the Air Carrier Access Act and

it prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in air travel and requires air carriers

to accommodate the needs of passengers with disabilities. Its main points are summarized

below in three categories:

Prohibitions of Discriminatory Practices: rules regarding the interaction

between airline carriers and their passengers that are disabled.

Accessibility Facilities: certain aircraft seating, storage and service features

regulations that would facilitate the trip for a disabled passenger.

Other Services and Accommodations: rules regarding boarding, security

screening, storage, assistive devices and accommodations.

2.4.5 The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is a wide ranging legislation devised

to make the American society more accessible to people with disabilities. It expands the

14
Rehabilitation Act regulations of 1973 not just those that receive federal funding, but to

all public and commercial facilities. It applies to many types of public places:

restaurants, retailers, movie theaters and health care institutions. Its homepage

(www.ada.gov) provides links to technical materials, publications, and proposed changes

to ADA regulations. Some of the proposed regulations are associated with web

accessibility. The laws for many of the new services and goods websites are unclear, as

the entities do not have a physical location for their customers. For those, the ADA

website provides an online course for businesses on Reaching out to Customers with

Disabilities. One of the most recent and widely applied regulations that directly address

the need for accessibility over the Internet is Section 508.

2.4.6 Section 508

Section 508 refers to Section 508 of the U.S. Rehabilitation Act amended by

Congress in 1998. It requires that individuals with disabilities, who are members of the

public seeking information or services from a federal agency, have access to and use of

information and data that is comparable to that provided to the public who are not

individuals with disabilities, unless an undue burden would be imposed on the agency.

(Section 508, 2007)

It also requires that when Federal agencies develop, procure, maintain or use

electronic and information technology they must ensure that this technology allows:

Federal employees with disabilities to have access to and use of

information and data that is comparable to that by Federal employees
who are not individuals with disabilities, unless an undue burden would
be imposed on the agency, and

Individuals with disabilities, who are members of the public seeking

information or services from a Federal agency, to have access to and use

15
 of information and data that is comparable to that provided to the public
who are not individuals with disabilities.

The Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (or Access

Board) was charged with developing the technical and functional provisions that establish

a minimum level of accessibility. These technology-specific provisions address (Section

508 Standards, 2007):

Software applications and operating systems (1194.21)

Web-based intranet and internet information and applications (1194.22)

Telecommunications products (1194.23)

Video or multimedia products (1194.24)

Self-contained closed products such as copiers (1194.25)

Desktop and portable computers (1194.26)

According to the Association of Assistive Technology Act Programs

(http://www.ataporg.org/publications.asp), states which receive Federal funds under the

Assistive Technology Act of 1998 are required by that Act to provide an assurance of

compliance with Section 508. Currently all 50 states and all territories receive Assistive

Technology Act dollars and all have some form of Section 508 assurance."

As a government document, Section 508 is written in a very formal style and is

more abstract and less detailed than the W3C Web Content Guidelines. It also does not

provide information about the practical application of the guidelines. Many websites such

as the Access Board website (Access Board, 2007) have been developed to help the

interpretation of Section 508 standards. A summary has been adopted from the Access

Board website and is provided in Table 1.

16
 Table 1 Section 508 Standards Summary

Components Description
(a) Text tags A text equivalent for every nontext element shall be provided
(via alt, longdesc, or in element content).
(b) Multimedia Equivalent alternatives for any multimedia presentation shall
presentations be synchronized with the presentation.
(c) Color Web pages shall be designed so that all information conveyed
with color is also available without color.
(d) Readability Documents shall be organized so they are readable without
requiring an associated style sheet
(e) Server-side image Redundant text links shall be provided for each active region
maps of a server-side image map
(f) Client-side image maps Client-side image maps shall be provided instead of server-
side image maps except where the regions cannot be defined
with an available geometric shape.
(g) and (h) Data table Row and column headers shall be identified for data tables.
Markup shall be used to associate data cells and header cells
for data tables that have two or more logical levels of row or
column headers.
(i) Frames Frames shall be titled with text that facilitates frame
identification and navigation
j) Flicker rate Pages shall be designed to avoid causing the screen to flicker
with a frequency greater than 2 Hz and lower than 55 Hz.
k) Text-only alternative A text-only alternative page with equivalent information or
functionality shall be provided to make a website comply with
the provisions of these standards, when compliance cannot be
accomplished in any other way. The content of the text-only
page shall be updated whenever the primary page changes.
l) Scripts Frames shall be titled with text that facilitates frame
identification and navigation.
m) Applets and plug-ins When a web page requires that an applet, plug-in or other
application be present on the client system to interpret page
content the page must provide a link to a plug-in or applet that
complies with 1194.21 (a) through (l).
n) Electronic forms When electronic forms are designed to be completed online,
the form shall allow people using assistive technology to
access the information, field elements, and functionality
required for completion and submission of the form, including
all directions and cues.
o) Navigation links A method shall be provided that permits users to skip
repetitive navigation links
p) Time delays When a timed response is required, the user shall be alerted
and given sufficient time to indicate more time is required.

17
 Section 508 does not generally apply to private sector businesses and their

websites. In contrast, companies in the UK have an obligation on all websites offered to

the public: they must be accessible and usable by disabled people.

Other countries follow the UK approach. On 25th August 2006, the United

Nations published an agreed text of a draft International Convention on the Rights of

Persons with Disabilities. it addresses web accessibility among other issues.

A comparison of the WCAG and the Section 508 Standards has been made by Dr.

Jim Thatcher (http://www.jimthatcher.com/sidebyside.htm/). Summary tables are

enclosed in Appendix B. Section 508 standards tend to define the minimum level of web

accessibility, while the WCAG represent higher level of accessibility. Overall, the

WCAG is more detailed (restrictive) in terms of describing specific guidelines. Unlike

Section 508, WCAG Version 2.0 provides guidelines focused not only on HTML but also

on other web technologies. Section 508 lacks regulations on dynamic content, auditory

descriptions, language selection. On the other hand, the WCAG is missing specific

guidelines for timed responses and the ability to skip navigation.

The new regulations have drawn national and international attention because of

their implications on every retailer, business and organization that maintains an online

presence. There have already been a number of lawsuits against entities whose websites

are completely or partly inaccessible to blind and low vision customers.

2.5 Lawsuits

In April of 2000, for example the National Federation for the Blind (NFB) filed an

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) lawsuit against the Connecticut Attorney

General's Office. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) official website provided links to

18
four inaccessible online tax filing services (Intuit, HDVest, H&R Block, and CioCia). The

four tax filing services agreed to make their Web sites accessible in time for the next

years tax season.

In March 2000, an Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) agreement was

reached between the California Council for the Blind and Bank of America to install

2,500 talking Automatic Teller Machines (ATMs) in Florida and California and to ensure

its Web sites and online banking services are accessible to people using screen-readers.

In a more recent case, the NFB is suing Target.com, alleging that the department

store discriminates against the visually impaired by violating state and federal laws that

protect the disabled.

All these instances and more prove that the ADA, Section 508 and the WCAG are

not just guidelines that can be overlooked, but are strong legislative tools to protect the

interest of a large segment of the nation. At the same time, the cases have also raised

awareness among businesses that have already taken measures to improve the

accessibility of their websites.

A part of the e-commerce that already has a wide blind and low-vision population

is the online music sector.

2.6 The Digital Music Industry

The entertainment industry has been a significant source of revenue for decades

now. A big part of it is the audio and music market. The past several years, however, have

seen a decline in sales of physical units (CDs, cassettes, etc.). Global unit sales of items

shipped fell 7.6 percent in 2005 (Recording Industry Association of America, 2006). At

the same time the e-commerce industry has been booming (Figure 3).

19
 Figure 3 U.S. Music Sales

According to Nick Bertolotti, a media analyst at Credit Suisse in London, "Digital

sales are growing quite nicely, and that's beneficial because the margins are higher

because there are no manufacturing costs. The International Federation of Phonographic

Industry reports that the total digital music sales tripled in 2005 to $1.1 billion. In

contrast, the wholesale value equivalent of the music industry in 2005, when combining

both digital and physical revenues, is $7.0 billion. Appendix H provides the complete

statistical data for 2005 as reported by the Recording Industry Association of America.

2.7 The Audio Books Industry

When Ampex made tape recorders available to the general public in 1948, the

National Bureau of Standards created the design of the first talking book machine.

Shortly after, the first recordings that can be called audio books were being made for

20
blind war veterans. The first commercial audio publisher, Caedmon published its first

audio book just as Philips created the first audio cassette.

The production of audio books evolved during the years. In 1987, the Audio

Publishers Association was founded to bring all publishers together and support the audio

book industry.

Currently, the industry is evaluated at more than $2 billion (2002) with a growth

rate of 41% (1996 2000). Further, the Library of Congress is in the process of

converting all content to digital format.

With the growing popularity of iPods, MP3 players and cell phones with audio

capabilities, there is a new trend about how audio books are being sold. As a result, a new

market niche has opened. While e-books still account for less than one percent of print

sales, digital downloads more than doubled to six percent of the $800m audio book

market in 2004. (MacKenzie, 2007). The Audio Publishers Association (APA)

conducted a sales survey to gather industry sales data, including gross sales and sales by

various formats. The survey was conducted in the summer of 2006 by the independent

research firm of Lewis & Clark Research. The survey analyzed sales data from 2005

against data from the previous year and showed a 4.7 percent increase with audio book

sales reaching $871 million. Furthermore, Internet downloads of audio books have been

the major contributor to the $29 million of audio book sales (U.S.) in 2004. This amount

to an approximately increase of 14% from 2001.

There are many benefits for migrating to electronic audio books. They eliminate

issues with storage of cassettes. Playing magnetic tape audio cassettes over and over

again significantly decreases the sound quality. Electronic audio books are easier to

21
deliver (simply download) and disseminate in libraries. They can also be played from

many sources, not necessarily iPod other MP3 players, the home computer, cell phones.

There are several companies competing for share in this market. They are Audible,

iTunes, Yahoo! Music Unlimited, Napster, Barnes & Noble and Amazon. The next

sections provide a brief overview of each company.

2.7.1 Audible.com

Audible is the leader in providing audio content online. It has over 4,500 audio

books and 14,000 other programs from 293 content partners. The total time of all audio is

over 120,000 hours. Audibles content is compatible with more than 190 portable audio

devices. The website provides several levels of subscriptions and prices. Audible is also

the exclusive provider of audio books for Apple iTunes.

Figure 4 Screenshot of the Audible.com website

22
 The company revenue for 2006 is $82.3 million (Table 2). This is an increase of

240% since 2004 when revenue was 34.3 million (Hoovers, 2007).

Table 2 Audible Inc. Annual Income Statements

2006 2005 2004
Revenue ($mil.) 82.3 64.2 34.3
Gross Profit ($mil.) 32.6 27.5 14.9
Net Income ($mil.) (8.7) (0.6) 2.0

2.7.2 iTunes

Apple Computer, Inc. launched the iTunes Music Store on April 28, 2003 as an

online music store. It now sells not only music, but videos, TV shows, movies, and video

games. The iTunes store also provides a selection of more than 20,000 books During his

keynote for MacWorld in January 2007, Apple CEO Steve Jobs announced that the store

has sold more than 2 billion songs which is over 80% of the global online digital music

sales. iTunes charges $0.99 per song and about $18.00 for every audio book.

Figure 5 Screenshot of iTunes Music Store

23
 Another feature of the iTunes store is its wide variety of podcasts. A podcast is a

media file that is distributed over the Internet and can be played on personal computers

(Windows) and Macs (Mac OS). Currently the store hosts more than 65,000 podcasts,

most of which resemble radio shows and are available for free. (CNET Product Reviews,

2007)

2.7.3 Yahoo! Music Unlimited

Yahoo! MUSIC Unlimited was opened on May 11, 2005 and allows users to play

and save over 2 million full-length songs. It is a subscription service that allows full

access to the entire library for $5.99. Once a users subscription expires or is cancelled,

the Digital Rights Management (DRM) does not allow access to the downloaded files. Its

interface is similar to the one for iTunes. The software allows users to transfer the music

to a portable device with an additional $5 monthly charge. The subscription includes

access to over 100 radio stations. Unlike iTunes, however, it provides only music

downloads and runs on Windows machines only.

Figure 6 Screenshot of the Yahoo! Music Unlimited software

24
2.7.4 Rhapsody

Rhapsody (Figure 7) was launched by RealNetworks in December, 2001. It offers

a streaming as well as downloading from its 1.5 million songs library. Each individual

song download costs $0.89. A Rhapsody Unlimited subscription costs $9.99 and allows

unlimited streams of the Rhapsody website. Users can also download an unlimited

number of songs that are protected by DRM, which expires as soon as the subscription is

over. Rhapsody Unlimited also provides unlimited access to all radio stations.

Figure 7 Screenshot for Rhapsody Jukebox

Rhapsody to Go is also a paid service that provides the features of Rhapsody

Unlimited and the ability to transfer music onto a compatible portable device. In addition

to music, Rhapsody provides streaming of all radio stations. The software that comes

25
with the service is called Rhapsody Jukebox and is compatible with Windows, Mac and

Linux.

2.7.5 Napster

At the beginning, Napster was a project of a Computer Science student at

Northeastern University in Boston, MA. It offered free downloads through P2P file

sharing, but was sued and shut down. A comeback followed. Now Napster provides legal

DRM downloads and music subscription services (Figure 8). It has two levels of

membership: Napster and Napster to Go. The former costs $9.95/month and allows

access to over 1 million songs. Napster to Go entitles the user to transfer the songs onto a

portable player.

Figure 8 Screenshot for Napster

26
2.7.6 Barnes & Noble and Amazon.com

Barnes & Noble (Figure 9) and Borders also sell music and audio books. Unlike

the previous examples, however, being traditional click-and-mortar converts, their online

stores (BarnesandNoble.com and Amazon.com respectively) sell primarily physical

media (CDs and cassettes), rather than electronic files.

Figure 9 Screenshot of the Barnes & Noble

The Internet sales play an important role because there are many back list titles

that are not stocked in the store outlets. Both stores provide a preview feature where the

potential buyer can hear parts of the audio book online. Of the two stores, Amazon.com

leads sales and revenue (Table 3). Nevertheless, the income growth rate is actually

negative and profit is declining.

27
Table 3 Key Financial Numbers for Amazon.com and Barnes & Noble (Hoovers, 2007)
Amazon.com Barnes &
Noble
2006 Revenue ($mil) 10,711.00 $5,261.3
1-Year Sales Growth 26.2% 3.1%
Total Net Income (mil.) $190 $150.5
1-Year Net Income Growth (47.1%) 2.6%

The decline is partly caused by the emergence of the entirely online stores like

iTunes that do not have any physical access point the business, the location and even

the product are virtual.

28
3. Problem Research Question

The newly emerging technologies and the ever increased demand for information

in todays society introduce many questions to the blind and visually impaired. An online

blog called The Voice of the Nations Blind says that the Internet is a huge boon for

blind people and that they do use it for banking, booking plane tickets, and shopping for

things such as groceries and music. Music and audio content is especially important to

blind and low vision users, as this is the one of the few ways they receive information.

With audio content playing such an important role in blind peoples lives, this

study focuses on the impact of accessibility on online music stores on the blind

population and tries to review and answer two questions:

(1) Are online audio stores accessible for blind and low-vision users?

(2) How does accessibility affect usage?

In order to investigate these questions, a study is designed to measure and

evaluate the usage and accessibility of two of popular online stores by the blind and

visually impaired community. After reviewing the most popular online music and audio

books stores (See previous section), iTunes and Amazon.com are selected for the study.

Currently, iTunes sales account for 80% of all digital download sales (Mihailescu, 2006)

and is regarded as one of the most popular digital media stores (Schonfeld, 2006). In the

meantime, Amazon.com has been investing more than $300 million on technology and

content to build a digital-download business as well in order to compete with iTunes. The

return on investment is just about to come. With millions of users visiting the online store

daily, it is easily becoming a large promoter of digital downloads.

29
4. Methodology

To obtain objective information that will help answer the research questions, both

qualitative and quantitative data collection methods were used to measure information

accessibility.

4.1 Qualitative Data

To gather qualitative data, a survey was developed which aimed to evaluate the

usability, ease of use, usefulness, and behavioral intent to use of two popular online

music and audio books stores. The following sections discuss the participants of the

survey, the procedure for collecting the survey, the task presented to the participants and

the measurements used to analyze the data.

4.1.1 Participants

The target population for the study consisted of all individuals who are

completely blind, partially blind, legally blind, have low vision or are wearing corrective

lenses and have difficulties reading small or cluttered type and use a computer or the

Internet. The participants in this study belong to a random sample of the target

population. Each participant volunteered to join the survey. The participants input was

honest, unbiased and to the best of their knowledge.

Of the 22 subjects studied, 8 were female and 14 were male. Their age ranged

from 17 to 61 average age at the time of the study was 39.5 years (Figure 10). The

subjects had different visual acuity ranging from sighted, near-sighted, light perception,

low vision, partially blind and completely blind. Of the population, 90% were using the

30
Internet on a daily basis, and 95% have said they have a medium-to-high level of

experience using computers. While everyone has stated that they use the Internet for

Email and/or Instant Messaging, only 32% are using it to sell products and/or services.

About 68% say that they use it to buy products and/or services. Appendix E provides all

summary tables and graphs of demographics.

Age Distribution

12
10
8
Participants 6
4
2
0
Under 21 21-39 40-64 65+

Age Groups

Figure 10 Age Groups of Participants of the Survey

4.1.2 Procedure

To gather the population, a message was posted on several online forums, mailing

lists and bulletin boards for blind and low vision members, and was emailed to a number

of users. The materials provided were (1) the survey, (2) a cover letter noting that the

research project was initiated and supported by the Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI)

and giving contact information for further updates on the research, (3) informed consent

statement, and (4) instructions on how to complete the survey. The incentive for

completing the survey was a chance to win $100 gift card. The Informed Consent form

explicitly mentioned the award. The winners email was drawn at random to be used for

contact and arrangements for sending the gift card. Due to the nature of contacting

31
subjects, there was no way to determine the number of people the survey information had

reached. The response rate of the users that had received the direct email was 15%.

The survey consisted of questions designed to measure the perceived usability and

usefulness of Amazon.com and the iTunes store and to examine the difference between

the two. The participants were first asked to complete a set of demographics questions

(Table 4) to gather general information about the population, while preserving anonymity

by disconnecting the personal data from the responses.

Demographics Items

1. What is your gender?

2. What year were you born?
3. Select the statement that best describes your visual acuity?
sighted
nearsighted
farsighted
low-vision
partially blind
completely blind
other (indicated in free text by participant)
4. Do you use corrective lenses?
5. Do you use assistive software?
6. If you use assistive software, please indicate what kind is it? (indicated in
free text by participant)
7. How often do you use the web?
Daily
Once a week
Once a month
Never
8. How would you rate your experience level with using computers ranging
from 1 to 7 with 1 being not familiar and 7 being very familiar?
9. Do you use the web for:
Browsing / Surfing
Creating web pages
Email or Instant Messaging
Buying products / services
Selling products / services
Locating product / service information
Locating personal information
Reading news articles
Other reasons (indicated in free text by participant)

Table 4 Demographics questions for survey participants

32
 Responses to questions 1, 2, 3, 4, 7 and 8 were required and unless participants

provided answers to them, they could not proceed to the survey. After that the survey

questions were presented. The study was designed as a repeated measures experiment

which means that data is obtained for two measurements of the response variables. The

reason for using this model is so that each participant can evaluate both online stores,

thus eliminating bias of a single participant toward a certain variable. The set of questions

about the each store were presented at a random order in order to further ensure there is

no bias. Figure 11 illustrates the entire survey scenario walkthrough. Each step in the

figure is numbered. The number corresponds to a screenshot in Appendix G and a

description below.

(1) Informed Consent Form presents the participant with general

information about the survey plus the incentive to participate in it.

(2) Demographic Questions questions referring to gender, age, visual

acuity and internet use.

(3) Task I a task to find a specific song of an artists album and write the
response in an answer box.

(4) Questions questions regarding the user experience with the specific
online store just used.

(5) Task II a task to find a specific song of an artists album and write
the response in an answer box.

(6) Questions questions regarding the user experience with the specific
online store just used.

(7) Thank You a thank you page confirming participation in the survey
and the random drawing for the gift card.

(8) Thank You a thank you page for anyone who has refused to
participate in the survey after reading the Informed Consent Form.

33
 Figure 11 Survey Scenario Walkthrough

4.1.3 Task

Because tasks were drawn at random, the participant was presented with either

Task I or Task II first. To complete the task, the participant had to leave the survey and

search for a specific piece of information regarding something found in the iTunes online

34
store (Task I) or Amazon.com (Task II). The tasks were considered to reflect essential

functionality of each of those online stores searching for items to purchase. Upon

completion of the task, the participant was expected to return to the survey and provide

the information he/she has found. Immediately thereafter, a set of questions regarding the

participants experience with the store (iTunes or Amazon.com respectively) were asked.

Survey Questions
For each of the following questions please indicate your opinion about
this online store.

1. I find the iTunes store to be useful

2. Using the iTunes store enhances my effectiveness in finding information
3. I find the information in the iTunes store interesting to me
4. My interaction with the iTunes store was clear and understandable
5. I find the iTunes store to be easy to use
6. Interacting with the iTunes store did not require a lot of my mental effort
7. I find it easy to get the iTunes store to do what I want it to do
8. Previously, I have visited the iTunes store
9. I intend to use the iTunes store
10. I predict that I would use the iTunes store in the next 6 months

This online store is:

11. Easy to Use/Difficult to use

12. Flexible/Inflexible
13. Forgiving/Unforgiving
14. Friendly/Unfriendly
15. Close/Remote
16. Convenient/Inconvenient
17. Nearby/Distant
18. Unobstructed/Obstructed
19. Certain/Uncertain
20. Dependable/Undependable
21. Failure-Free/Failure-Prone
22. Reliable/Unreliable

Table 5 Survey questions presented after completion of the task particular assigned

35
4.1.4 Measurements

This study investigated Internet accessibility of online audio stores. In order to

measure accessibility, previous technological measurements research from the domain of

information systems had to be considered. Several models with different measuring

criteria had been reviewed before finalizing the decision on adopting two. The

Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) (Davis, 1989) offers a powerful and efficient

explanation for user acceptance and usage behavior. Through various empirical tests,

TAM has proved to be a robust tool for assessing user acceptance. TAM has been

validated across a wide range of information technologies (see Gefen, D. for a summary

of this literature), across levels of expertise (Understanding information technology

usage, 1995), and across certain countries (Rose, G. 1998). So far, TAM has not been

tested to assess web accessibility of online stores, but recent studies suggest that this

model applies well to e-commerce. TAM posits that user acceptance is determined by two

key beliefs, namely perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use. Figure 12 illustrates

the interrelationship between accessibility, usefulness, ease of use, behavioral intent to

use and usage. This studys goal was to find out how usage of the online stores is affected

whenever they are not accessible by blind and low-vision users.

TAM

Figure 12 Research Model

36
 Perceived Usefulness (U)

The degree to which one believes that using a specific technology will improve

ones performance is referred to as usefulness. Outcome expectations, instrumentality and

motivation are directly linked to the perceptions of the performance, hence the perceived

usefulness. A significant part of the technology acceptance model research infers that

perceived usefulness has a strong influence on user acceptance, adoption, and usage

behavior (Davis, 1989).

Perceived Ease of Use (EOU)

The extent to which one thinks that the system will be free from effort is defined

as perceived ease of use (Davis, 1989). Perceived ease of use affects intention directly

and indirectly (via perceived usefulness). The former implies that increased perceived

ease of use may cause an increase user acceptance. The indirect relationship can be

explained in the notion that the easier a technology is to use, the more useful it can be.

The technology acceptance model has demonstrated that the direct relationship between

EOU-BI is most relevant, while the indirect relationship via perceived usefulness is less

important.

The second model used is adopted from the research paper The Dimensions of

Accessibility to Online Information: Implications for Implementing Office Information

Systems (Culnan, 1984). The authors research focuses on two issues (1) what are the

dimensions of accessibility for an online system?, and (2) are physical access to the

system and access to the actual information separate dimensions in an online system? To

answer those, three informational accessibility items are evaluated:

37
 ease of use,

convenience,

and reliability.

Each of them encompasses four distinct metrics, or a total of 12 metrics

altogether: ease of use, flexibility, forgiveness, closure, convenience, distance,

obstruction, certainty, dependability, failure, and reliability. Using those metrics, the

survey participants graded the online stores on a 7 point Likert scale (Siegle, 2007).

Furthermore, the success rate of completing each task was also evaluated.

Because the tasks assigned are very particular and have an unambiguous question

associated with them, answering that question correctly was an indicator of successfully

completing the task. The ratio of successes over failures was considered a success rate. A

timing variable was also assigned to the survey. It records the time it takes every

participant to complete a single task. The assumption is that the longer it takes to finish a

task in the online store, the harder it is to use that online store.

Subjective qualitative data are also collected in the form of free-text feedback,

provided at the end of each set of survey questions about the particular online store.

4.2 Quantitative Data

Quantitative data was measured by WebXACT. WebXACT is a verification tool

that scans a website for quality, accessibility and privacy. It allows scanning based on

pre-defined accessibility guidelines. One can test a web page for a conformance level

using either Section 508 or W3Cs WCAG, for example, as it focuses on the following

factors:

38
 Alt text: does the online store provide alternative text for its images?

Is it easy to distinguish foreground information from its background?

Is all functionality operable via a keyboard interface?

Does the content cause seizures due to photosensitivity?

Are there mechanisms to help users find content and navigate through the
interface?

Is the functionality of content predictable?

Is content supported with current and future user agents?

If content is not accessible, is there an accessible version provided that meets the
criteria?

Based on the developed methodology a set of results were obtained. The data

from the survey was collected on an SQL database. The Results section below explains

how the data was handled and provides interpretation of the survey participant responses.

39
5. Results

The survey questions are developed from scales that have been used and validated

in previous TAM studies (Davis, 1989). The scales and variables for each of the questions

in the survey are revisited below

Usefulness (U)
1. I find the iTunes store to be useful
2. Using the iTunes store enhances my effectiveness in finding information
3. I find the information in the iTunes store interesting to me

Ease of Use (EOU)

4. My interaction with the iTunes store was clear and understandable
5. I find the iTunes store to be easy to use
6. Interacting with the iTunes store did not require a lot of my mental effort
7. I find it easy to get the iTunes store to do what I want it to do

Behavioral Intent to Use (BIU)

8. Previously, I have visited the iTunes store
9. I intend to use the iTunes store
10. I predict that I would use the iTunes store in the next 6 months

The results from each of those questions were assigned to variables. The notation

follows Initial + Question number notation. Once the data was collected, the SPSS

software package was used to compute frequencies, means, percentage, reliability test

(Cronbachs alpha), Pearson correlation and regression analysis. The complete Pearson

test result analysis tables are enclosed in Appendices C and D.

The Cronbachs alpha is a coefficient of reliability (or consistency). A coefficient

of 0.70 is considered acceptable for most statistical studies (Nunnally, 1978). It is used to

test whether a set of variables measure the same data and can be combined into a single

scale. In this case for example, the measure of usefulness tests if questions 1, 2, 3 were

related. Table 6 and Table 7 show that the reliability variable is above 0.70. Similar

40
assumptions can be inferred about Ease of Use and Behavioral Intent to Use. This implies

that the items for this study fall within acceptable range.

Table 6 Reliability analysis of data for iTunes

Component Cronbachs Alpha
Usefulness 0.737
Ease of Use 0.912
Behavioral Intent to Use 0.879

Table 7 Reliability analysis of data for Amazon

Component Cronbachs Alpha
Usefulness 0.816
Ease of Use 0.935
Behavioral Intent to Use 0.888

Principal component factor analysis (with Varimax rotation) was also performed

to confirm the variables load correctly. This analysis works well with large sample sizes.

A case of 100 subjects is considered poor, and the bare minimum is 10 (UCLA, 2007).

Table 8 and Table 9 provide the results of the factor analysis.

Table 8 Factor analysis of data for iTunes

Component
1 2 3
Ease .399 .830 -.011
Flexibility .266 .931 .061
Forgiveness .581 .330 .118
Friendly .646 .466 .407
Close .249 .069 .940
Convenient .202 .774 .502
Nearby .248 .205 .920
Unobstructed .773 .241 .494
Certain .742 -.234 .543
Dependable .815 .405 .107
FailureFree .844 .327 .277
Reliable .810 .356 .198
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.
a Rotation converged in 8 iterations.

41
 Table 9 Factor analysis of data for Amazon
Component
1 2 3
Ease .822 .210 .333
Flexibility .848 .193 .257
Forgiveness .537 .767 .003
Friendly .860 .255 .252
Close .399 .465 .738
Convenient .876 .230 .310
Nearby .458 .419 .748
Unobstructed .622 .273 .695
Certain .391 .582 .575
Dependable .466 .710 .314
FailureFree .176 .834 .340
Reliable .033 .857 .392
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.
a Rotation converged in 7 iterations.

Table 10 Factor distribution for the two online stores

Factor iTunes Amazon
1 Forgiving Easy
Friendly Flexible
Unobstructed Friendly
Certain Convenient
Dependable
Failure-Free
Reliable
2 Easy Forgiving

Flexible Dependable
Convenient Failure-Free
Reliable
3 Close Nearby
Not loading Nearby Unobstructed

Certain

Table 10 summarizes the factor loadings. For iTunes, all four of reliability

variables (reliable, dependable, failure-free and certain) loaded together along with two

ease of use (forgiving and friendly) and one convenience variables (unobstructed). Easy,

flexible and convenient loaded on a single factor as well. This implies dependence

between ease of use and convenience for both iTunes and Amazon. For Amazon, the four

reliability variables loaded unambiguously which is consistent with the model (Culnan,

42
1984). Close and nearby loaded on a single factor. From the participants feedback, these

two variables were hard to interpret in the context of the online stores.

To determine the associations between Usefulness, Ease of Use, Behavioral Intent

to Use and Usage, linear multiple regression analyses are conducted.

The source of qualitative data is primarily the feedback each participant left at the

end of each task of the survey. Some of the comments are summarized below. On average

it took iTunes users 6:17 minutes and Amazon.com users 4:41 minutes to complete the

task. Furthermore, the success rate for completing the Amazon task was 0.69, while the

same for iTunes was 0.47.

iTunes Feedback Amazon.com Feedback

Very difficult to use with my disabilities Much more accessible because I can search
the content with Google, and use all the
accessibility features that my web browser
offers. Also, i think that the last question ate my
answer - I got the song Home in 40secs.
I could not get the i-tunes store to display just I use Amazon for shopping. It is very cluttered
the album in album order. All songs were for me using JAWS. Lots of information that I
ranked by relevance to my search... right now have to navigate through that I really don't like
there is no easy way to change the results or need.
order by groups other than relevance.
This is the first time on itunes and i had a hard amazon was not too difficult to use, but the
time monuvering around the sight with my jaws program jaws did not allow me to preview the
program. the discriptions used on the graphics song.
were numbers and not descriptions of the
actual graphics.

The results can be discussed and analyzed further more. The next two sections

review the findings and provide some conclusions that could be of significance for

future research.

43
6. Discussion

Following is a quote from Apple computers website.

Since 1985 Apple has been committed to helping people with disabilities access

their personal computer. Apples commitment to accessibility is evident throughout the

Mac OS X operating system which is by design, easy to use, but also includes a wide

variety of features and technologies specifically designed to provide accessibility to users

with disabilities. (Apple, 2007)

iTunes is an application that is an integral part of the Mac OS X operating system.

It is a default music player, library cataloguer and online store. The Apple iTunes Store

uses web components uniquely within an existing desktop application. Users can load the

iTunes store using a web-based interface through a browser that is built in the application

itself. User who can use a mouse can browse, preview and purchase music and

audiobooks, subscribe to podcasts, listen to podcasts live, read reviews, listen and

purchase music and then directly integrate it into their existing music collection.

However, the iTunes application itself is not accessible. Some issues are that menus do

not have labels that the screen access software understands, thus each menu is read as

context menu. While a user with visual disability can use iTunes to import music from

a CD, it is nearly impossible to do anything else. A visually impaired user cannot select

songs and burn a CD of those songs. For sighted users this can be easily done with a

mouse click on the Burn button of the screen. Even though there are keyboard shortcut

commands they are as ineffective as well. For example, if the user wants to reshuffle the

current playlist, the command is Shift+Shuffle button.

44
 In addition, iTunes is a complete music manager for the PC. It has a Library and

Music Store. During installation it will often become the default player for audio files.

Due to lack of accessibility, the iTunes music library collection cannot be navigated

through iTunes. Blind users need to access the files in the My Music folder through

Windows Explorer. If there is an iPod connected, however, the only way that files cannot

be done through Windows explorer, but only through the inaccessible iTunes interface.

This means that it is impossible for a a blind or low vision user to erase any songs from

their iPod.

Lastly, iTunes is a primary medium for purchasing music. Currently, it is

impossible for people with visual disabilities to access the built-in content of the iTunes

music store. A set of blind and low vision iTunes users testimonials is enclosed in

Appendix A. It is not accessible by screen readers, cannot be navigated using a keyboard,

and it does not offer variable font sizes. The top of the page includes three image ads that

rotate every 20 seconds. First, there is no way for a blind or low vision user to know

when the ad has changed. Secondly, none of those images provide alternative text, so in

effect they cannot be accessed by a user agent. The same is true about a section further

down, which includes a set of featured content like podcasts and free music downloads.

The worlds number one online retailer Amazon.coms website, on the other hand

is still providing mainly physical products (CDs and tapes). It is in advanced talks with

four global music companies about a digital music service with features that will set it

apart from iTunes such as a subscription service (WSJ, 2007).

The growing trend among the online content stores is to use proprietary software

to access their store, rather than a traditional web browser. While this has benefits for the

45
company, as it protects its brand name and does not allow copying, it has an adverse

effect on the blind. The technologies they use to access the web need to be up-to-date

with the growing number of different formats and applications available to view the

online stores. Furthermore, the online stores embedded applications are not accessible, as

in the iTunes case described above. A survey participant had commented that traditional

web browsers (and websites) are a much easier medium. Amazon.com is still accessed

through a web browser. This makes it more accessible than proprietary software stores.

The Amazon website could be evaluated using Watchfire WebXACT. It found four errors

for Priority 1 WCAG guidelines, six for Priority 2 and four for Priority 3. The result is

that it does NOT comply with all of the automatic and manual checkpoints of the W3C

guidelines and requires repairs and verification. A complete list of the errors is provided

in Appendix F. Nevertheless, because Amazon.com is accessed through a web browser, it

is much more accessible.

When we look at the time required to complete the task, Amazon stands out as the

one who requires the least time. If we assume that time equals effort and effort is

inversely proportionate to ease of use, then of the two applications, Amazon.com is the

easier to use. Furthermore, the success rate of completing the task assigned is

significantly higher in the Amazon.com store.

Taking into account the percentage of participants in this survey who have stated

that they use the internet to buy products or services (68%), it is important to note that

blind and low vision users are just as likely to purchase music and audio books online as

are sighted users. The logical reasoning is that there should be no reason to differentiate

and exclude them from an online transaction, and hence access to an online store.

46
 There are millions of people who depend on hearing and can benefit from an

accessible online store. The number of users who are currently struggling to use an

inaccessible online store such as iTunes is also remarkable. It would be wise for Amazon

to avoid the mistake of iTunes and develop their online music store in a way that will be

accessible to users. Otherwise the industry would be still missing out on a large

population of potential users.

47
7. Limitations and Future Research

Discussion of the results can only be viable if some potential limitations of the

study are considered. First and foremost, it is important to note the measures of collecting

the sample, the sample size and the survey type. Subjects were recruited online. The

assumption was made that using an online survey is a good method for collecting the

sample, as the study measures online accessibility. This had some good reasoning behind,

as an online survey would reach more potential participants nationwide, than a local one

would. A major issue with collecting the sample was the difficulty finding subjects.

Because of privacy issues most agencies contacted refused to release contact information

about any of their visually impaired affiliates.

Secondly, the subjects participated via online communication and responded to

questions online. Due to the nature of the Internet, online surveys are often not taken as

seriously as paper surveys. To avoid that, an incentive of $100 gift card was given. This,

however, may have affected the response rate. Typically, participants were asked to

forward the message to as many of their blind and low vision friends to participate. The

small sample size might be caused by the unwillingness of participants to collaborate in

order to increase their chances of winning the gift card.

Just like every other study, it should also be noted that the data and analysis are

valid for this particular single population, using the two particular online stores (Amazon

and iTunes) at a single point in time. Future studies should include a different, possibly

larger population. The benefits of future research would be backing up findings in this

study. Future work could be done in writing plug-ins and scripts for JAWS to improve

accessibility of iTunes.

48
8. Conclusion

This study has tested the relationship between Web Accessibility and Usage by

blind and low-vision users, taking into account the technology acceptance (Davis, 1989)

and information accessibility models (Culnan, 1984). The study has shed light on the

impending issue of accessibility of online audio stores, examining how the user

experience can differ greatly between two online stores.

The study is important to researchers as it provides information the state of the

industry and the industry trends. To businesses, the study gives data on the reaction of the

blind and low vision section of the population to an inaccessible user interface and

magnifies the significance of a well designed interface. The study is also useful to the

blind and low vision people as it raises awareness of the impending problem the newly

emerging online stores face.

49
References
Access Board (Web-based Intranet and Internet Information and Applications). Retrieved
January 28, 2007 from the World Wide Web: http://www.access-
board.gov/sec508/guide/1194.22.htm

Accessibility Definition. (2007). Retrieved February 2, 2007 from the World Wide Web:
http://webdesign.about.com/od/accessibility/g/bldefaccessibil.htm

Apple Accessibility. (2007). Retrieved January 15, 2007 from the World Wide Web:
http://www.apple.com/accessibility/

Bryman, Alan. (2001) Quantitative Data Analysis with SPSS Release 10 for Windows :
A Guide for Social Scientists

Earl, C., Leventhal J. Putting Words to Windows: A Review of JAWS for Windows and
Window-Eyes. Issue March 2000. Volume 1. Number 2

E-Stats: U.S. Census Bureau. (2007). Retrieved March 11, 2007 from the World Wide
Web: http://www.census.gov/estats

Cassin, B. and Solomon, S. Dictionary of Eye Terminology. 1990

Culnan, M., (1984). The Dimensions of Accessibility to Online Information: Implications

for Implementing Office Information Systems, ACM Transactions on Office Information
Systems, Vol. 2, No. 2, April 1984. Pages 141-150

CNET Product Reviews. (2007) Retrieved January 28, 2007 from the World Wide Web:
http://www.cnet.com/.

Davis, F. Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of

Information Technology MIS Quarterly, Vol. 13, No. 3. (Sep., 1989), pp. 319-340.

Gerber, E. and Kirchner, K. "Who's Surfing? Internet Access and Computer Use by
Visually Impaired Youth and Adults". 2001. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness,
95 (3), 176-181

Gefen D. and Straub D. W., The relative importance of perceived ease-of-use in IS

adoption: A study of e-Commerce adoption, JAIS, vol. 1, no. 8, pp. 130, 2000.

Hoovers. (2007). Retrieved January 19, 2007 from the World Wide Web:
http://www.hoovers.com/

Kirkpatrick, A., Rutter, R., Heilmann, C., Thatcher, J., Waddell, C. (2006) Web
Accessibility: Web Standards and Regulatory Compliance, friends of ED

50
Likert, R. (1932). "A Technique for the Measurement of Attitudes" Archives of
Psychology 140, 55.

MacKenzie, K. Audio books open new chapter in digital age. Financial Times.
http://www.ft.com/

Mihailescu, V. (2006) Music Industry Seeing Significant Revenue Gains From Digital
Downloads. Retrieved March 11, 2007 from the World Wide Web:
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Music-Industry-Seeing-Significant-Revenue-Gains-
From-Digital-Downloads-22021.shtml

Nunnally, J. (1978). Psychometric Theory. McGraw-Hill, New York.

Paciello, M. G. Web Accessibility for People with Disabilities. 2000

Parker, L. (2006) . National Federation of the Blind files Target lawsuit.

(2007). Retrieved March 5, 2007 from the World Wide Web:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-10-25-blind_x.htm

Recording Industry Association of America, 2005 Year-End Shipment Numbers.

Retrieved: March 11, 2007 from the World Wide Web:
http://www.riaa.com/news/newsletter/033106.asp

Rose, G. and Straub, D. W. , Predicting general IT use: Applying TAM to the arabic
world, J. Global Inform. Manage., vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 3946, 1998.

University of Leicester. (2007). Retrieved February 10, 2007 from the World Wide Web:
http://www.le.ac.uk/av/pms12/teaching/magnifier.html.

Schonfeld, E. (2006) "Can Amazon take a bite out of Apple?" Retrieved from World Wide
Web on March 15, 2007
http://money.cnn.com/2006/07/26/technology/nextbigdownload0726.biz2/index.htm?post
version=2006072611

Section 508 Standards. (2007). Retrieved January 28, 2007 from the World Wide Web:
http://www.section508.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Content&ID=12.

Siegle, D. Beginning Steps in Developing an Attitude Instrument. Retrieved February

15, 2007 from the World Wide Web:
http://www.gifted.uconn.edu/siegle/research/Instrument Reliability and Validity/
instdeve.html

Target lawsuit tests limits of US web accessibility law (2007). Retrieved March 5,
2007 from the World Wide Web: http://www.out-law.com/page-7285

51
UCLA: What does Cronbachs alpha mean? (SPSS: FAQ) Retrieved March 12, 2007
from the World Wide Web: http://www.ats.ucla.edu/STAT/SPSS/faq/alpha.html

Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing models, Inform.

Syst. Res., vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 144176, June 1995.

US Census Bureau. (2007). Retrieved January 19, 2007 from the World Wide Web:
http://www.census.gov/

Venkatesh, V., Morris, M, Why dont men ever stop to ask for directions? Gender,
Social Influence, and Their Role in Technology Acceptance and Usage Behavior. MIS
Quarterly, 02767783, March 2000, Vol. 24, Issue 1

W3C. (2007). Retrieved January 19, 2007 from the World Wide Web:
http://www.w3.org.

WAI Mission and Organization. (2007). Retrieved February 16, 2007 from the World
Wide Web: http://www.w3.org/WAI/about.html.

WCAG. Retrieved on January 20, 2007 from World Wide Web

http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/

WHO. (2007) Retrieved January 26, 2007 from World Wide Web:
http://www.who.int/research/en/

Wall Street Journal (2007). Retrieved April 12, 2007 from World Wide Web:
http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=0&did=987658151&SrchMode=1&sid=1&Fmt=
3&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=PQD&TS=1176777964&clientId
=2618

52
Glossary

Blog short for weblog: a website on which an individual or group

of users produces an ongoing narrative.
Braille a form of written language for the blind, in which
characters are represented by patterns of raised dots that are
felt with the fingertips.
Digital Rights Management (DRM): a technology used to protect digital products from
copyright infringement. When a customer buys a DRM-
protected item, the item is encrypted specifically for that
customer.
Flash a popular authoring software used to create vector graphics-
based animation programs on the Internet.
Graphic user interface (GUI): a visual way of interacting with a computer using
items such as windows, icons, and menus, used by most
modern operating systems.
Hyperlink a link from a hypertext file or document to another location
or file, typically activated by clicking on a highlighted
word or image on the screen
Hypertext a software system that links topics on the screen to related
information and graphics, which are typically accessed by a
point-and-click method.
iPod a portable audio player designed and marketed by Apple
Computer. The device has a display and a clickwheel
through which the device can be manipulated.
MP3 a file format for computer recorded sounds popular for
transferring music via the Internet.
Operating system (OS): the software that supports a computers basic
functions, such as scheduling tasks, executing applications,
and controlling peripherals.
Peer-to-Peer (P2P): denoting a network or data communications in
which no dedicated server is involved
Podcast a method for publishing sound files to the Internet,
allowing users to receive audio by subscription, usually at
no cost
User agent a client application used with a particular network protocol.
User agents range from web browsers to screen readers and
Braille browsers used by visually disabled people.

53
Appendix A: User Feedback

Listed below are several email messages and forum posts received from blind users
testifying that they would like to use iTunes if it were more accessible.

I use iTunes, but only with limited successs. I would love to be able to use it more. For instance, I
an't even play around with the equalizer, or play around successfuly with play lists. I'd love to be
able to just have one player for everything, butno way that can happen till iTunes is much more
accessible than it is now. VoiceOver is very ... it doedsn't work well with it at al
Jane

I am a low vision user of iTunes. I generally prefer not to use the

visual interface of itunes, with the exception of the search function.
I would like to use itunes if it were more accessible.

Regards
Justin

I would immediately use iTunes to the fullest, including making purchases at the iTunes Store, if
the bleeping thing would work for me... I am blind (total) and I like music, -- and even videos!

Lou.

I do use [itunes] a bit now for really simple stuff, but the more advanced features are really
difficult to use and just don't make a lot of since to try.
Holly

I am visually impaired, that is more or less blind but too stubborn to admit it. I use iTunes a lot in
my life and am extremely interested in having it accessible. I am able to use much of it quite well
through work-arounds and such and have written instrructions for others to attempt the
same. The instructions were written for iTunes 6 but for the most part can be used in iTunes 7 as
well. You can see the article at www.voiceoverwiki.info and click on the iTunes link. If you have
any questions, feel free to contact me. Thanks for your interest in this.

Tim

I am totally blind and only use the Macintosh. I would be very interested to have access to Itunes.

Cordially,
Rafael

You can add me to a list of people wishing to use Itunes if it were accessible.
Nigel

54
I am interested in using iTunes. I am a legally blind individual who can
barely use the package with Zoomtext. It would be very gratifying if I
could use it, with all its features, including the iTunes Store, with a screen
reader like JFW or Window Eyes.

Thanks.
Stan

I can't shop in the itunes store for anything right now, because I can't read the interface, the screen is
hard to read and the search boxes aren't labeled well enough to get anywhere. Just an idea. I can
set my preferences, export songs, run the player, but the store is out of the question.

I am a totally blind Mac user as well as a PC user.

I'd not only love to be able to use the iTunes application in the Mac, but as well I'd like to be able
to access and use the iTunes Store.
No matter if you are discussing Windows/PC or Mac, iTunes and the iTunes store are not readily
accessible for those who depend on screen readers like JAWS or VoiceOver or any others for
that matter.
Dan

Yeah Phil, I'm concerned a lot of people would think that way and don't know why Apple can't see
it or can't or won't do anything about it. I can't even fetch podcasts from sites where there's an
iTunes link, which in my opinion is ridiculous!!! I've even gone to using podracer (a command-line
podcatching client) because of the limitations of accessibility of iTunes. Yes, there is much that
can be done with iTunes if you know the tricks to employ, but frankly, the only thing I really use
iTunes for is reading books from audible.com. I'm hoping this is fixed in Leopard; if it isn't, I think
one really has to question Apple's huge blind spot (pun intended) in this area.

That said, I love using my Mac and I'm glad I didn't decide on the basis of iTunes not to get one,
but the inaccessibility of iTunes' application and our inability to use the iTunes store even to
subscribe to a podcast is no small issue.
Cheryl

I am guessing that the reason behind Apple's slowness at increasingly accessibility for i Tunes is
that they are supporting two versions, one on Mac and the other on Windows.
Besides, there are other programs that may even play for files than i Tunes and I too only use it to
read Audible books.
James

I see the biggest issue here in not being able to access the iTunes Music Store. Once you have a
file there are a number of ways to play it such as with FrontRow which is accessible. The fact that
the iTunes Music Store is not accessible is a ADA legal concern and I am somewhat shocked that
Apple legal department hasn't taken notice of that fact. Would Apple ever build an inaccessible
physical store?

55
If I were Apple I would be watching the NFB vs. Target Stores case very closely because if the
courts rule that online stores must meet the same ADA requirements as physical ones iTunes
would make a really big target to go after.

I think the case can be made that it matters not if your business is on line or in the physical world,
it must be accessible.

Greg

Despite the awful iTunes software, I enjoy my iPod now that it is full of my music collection. I have
also used a BookPort, which I think is a great way for listening to Audible and Web Braille files.
While I am a big fan of the BookPort and the additional features the developers have added
based on feedback from consumers, I do not find it to be a practical option for a portable MP3
music player. You simply cannot get as much music onto those compact flash cards. Even if you
contemplate buying say fifteen 1GB compact flash cards, you are still going to be spending more
than what it would cost to buy an iPod (and that is on top of the cost of the BookPort). Thus, I find
the iPod to be a great way to carry and enjoy music. But, it has taken a lot of work to get all of my
music successfully into it and to learn to successfully navigate it with few errors.

Since the iPod is light and powerful, which is what we all want in technology, and since I can use
it comfortably because I have put the time into learning it, I love it! However, despite all of its
power, I cannot recommend it to blind persons who wish to have MP3 players from which they
can add and delete files on a regular basis. It simply takes too much work and patience to do so
successfully. Furthermore, while my experience in the Apple Store was great, I have not found
anyone at Apple who can talk to me about accessibility of the iPod. I have tried to hunt up a
knowledgeable person to talk to, but every time I start talking to someone about iPod
accessibility I am steered to a dead-end. While I am sure much of the Apple accessibility effort is
focused on the issue of speech access for the Mac operating system, I think they are missing a
huge opportunity, and we are missing out on a significant wave in portable audio.

I am not personally aware of another mainstream MP3 player that represents all of the features
and usability we would want as blind people. Many blind people have had success with Archos
players, and recently the Rio has emerged as a portable player that might be fairly useable. Yet,
there is always an element of guessing when navigating any of these players. We simply cannot
utilize these portable devices to their full capacity, but, if we could, there would be many benefits
to us as blind people.

56
Appendix B: Comparison between WCAG and
Section 508

57
Keywords WCAG Priority 1 Comparison Section 508
Text 1.1 Provide a text equivalent for every non-text element (e.g., via "alt", Similar 1194.22 (a) A text equivalent for every non-text
Equivalent "longdesc", or in element content). This includes: images, graphical element shall be provided (e.g., via "alt", "longdesc",
representations of text (including symbols), image map regions, or in element content).
animations (e.g., animated GIFs), applets and programmatic objects,
ascii art, frames, scripts, images used as list bullets, spacers, graphical
buttons, sounds (played with or without user interaction), stand-alone
audio files, audio tracks of video, and video.
Server-side 1.2 Provide redundant text links for each active region of a server-side The same 1194.22 (e) Redundant text links shall be provided
Image maps image map. for each active region of a server-side image map.
Auditory 1.3 Until user agents can automatically read aloud the text equivalent of Not found in
description a visual track, provide an auditory description of the important Section 508
information of the visual track of a multimedia presentation.
Synchronize 1.4 For any time-based multi-media presentation (e.g., a movie or The same 1194.22 (b) Equivalent alternatives for any multi-
d multimedia animation), synchronize equivalent alternatives (e.g., captions or media presentation shall be synchronized with the
auditory descriptions of the visual track) with the presentation. presentation.
Color 2.1 Ensure that all information conveyed with color is also available The same 1194.22 (c) Web pages shall be designed so that all
without color, for example from context or markup. information conveyed with color is also available
without color, for example from context or markup.
Natural 4.1 Clearly identify changes in the natural language of a document's Not found in
language text and any text equivalents (e.g., captions). Section 508
Table 5.1 For data tables, identify row and column headers. The same 1194.22 (g) Row and column headers shall be
headers identified for data tables.
Complex 5.2 For data tables that have two or more logical levels of row or The same 1194.22 (h) Markup shall be used to associate data
tables column headers, use markup to associate data cells and header cells. cells and header cells for data tables that have two
or more logical levels of row or column headers.
Style sheets 1194.22 (h) Markup shall be used to associate data cells and header The same 1194.22 (d) Documents shall be organized so they
cells for data tables that have two or more logical levels of row or are readable without requiring an associated style
column headers. sheet.
Dynamic 6.2 Ensure that equivalents for dynamic content are updated when the Not in 508
content dynamic content changes.
Scripting 6.3 Ensure that pages are usable when scripts, applets, or other WCAG is 1194.22 (l) When pages utilize scripting languages
programmatic objects are turned off or not supported. If this is not more to display content, or to create interface elements,
possible, provide equivalent information on an alternative accessible restrictive the information provided by the script shall be
page. identified with functional text that can be read by
assistive technology.
1194.22 (m) When a web page requires that an

applet, plug-in or other application be present on the

client system to interpret page content, the page
must provide a link to a plug-in or applet that

58
 complies with 1194.21(a) through (l).
Flicker 7.1 Until user agents allow users to control flickering, avoid causing the 508 is more 1194.22 (j) Pages shall be designed to avoid
screen to flicker. specific causing the screen to flicker with a frequency
greater than 2 Hz and lower than 55 Hz.
Client-side 9.1 Provide client-side image maps instead of server-side image maps The same 1194.22 (f) Client-side image maps shall be
image maps except where the regions cannot be defined with an available geometric provided instead of server-side image maps except
shape. where the regions cannot be defined with an
available geometric shape.
Text only last 11.4 If, after best efforts, you cannot create an accessible page, provide The same 1194.22 (k) A text-only page, with equivalent
resort a link to an alternative page that uses W3C technologies, is accessible, information or functionality, shall be provided to
has equivalent information (or functionality), and is updated as often as make a web site comply with the provisions of this
the inaccessible (original) page. part, when compliance cannot be accomplished in
any other way. The content of the text-only page
shall be updated whenever the primary page
changes.
Frames 12.1 Title each frame to facilitate frame identification and navigation. The same 1194.22 (i) Frames shall be titled with text that
facilitates frame identification and navigation.
Clear 14.1 Use the clearest and simplest language appropriate for a site's Not in 508
language content.

59
Appendix C: iTunes Pearson Correlation Tests

60
 U1 U2 U3 EOU1 EOU2 EOU3 EOU4 BIU1 BIU2 BIU3
U1 Pearson Correlation 1 .811(**) .380 .613(*) .557(*) .492 .771(**) .071 .456 .439
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .163 .015 .031 .063 .001 .801 .087 .102
N 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15
U2 Pearson Correlation .811(**) 1 .308 .799(**) .688(**) .701(**) .720(**) .240 .656(**) .584(*)
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .264 .000 .005 .004 .002 .389 .008 .022
N 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15
U3 Pearson Correlation .380 .308 1 .565(*) .572(*) .075 .489 .346 .560(*) .289
Sig. (2-tailed) .163 .264 .028 .026 .792 .064 .206 .030 .296
N 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15
EOU1 Pearson Correlation .613(*) .799(**) .565(*) 1 .883(**) .654(**) .797(**) .328 .674(**) .425
Sig. (2-tailed) .015 .000 .028 .000 .008 .000 .232 .006 .115
N 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15
EOU2 Pearson Correlation .557(*) .688(**) .572(*) .883(**) 1 .683(**) .807(**) .263 .711(**) .387
Sig. (2-tailed) .031 .005 .026 .000 .005 .000 .343 .003 .154
N 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15
EOU3 Pearson Correlation .492 .701(**) .075 .654(**) .683(**) 1 .566(*) .168 .672(**) .566(*)
Sig. (2-tailed) .063 .004 .792 .008 .005 .028 .550 .006 .028
N 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15
EOU4 Pearson Correlation .771(**) .720(**) .489 .797(**) .807(**) .566(*) 1 .411 .703(**) .480
Sig. (2-tailed) .001 .002 .064 .000 .000 .028 .128 .003 .070
N 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15
BIU1 Pearson Correlation .071 .240 .346 .328 .263 .168 .411 1 .676(**) .650(**)
Sig. (2-tailed) .801 .389 .206 .232 .343 .550 .128 .006 .009
N 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15
BIU2 Pearson Correlation .456 .656(**) .560(*) .674(**) .711(**) .672(**) .703(**) .676(**) 1 .806(**)
Sig. (2-tailed) .087 .008 .030 .006 .003 .006 .003 .006 .000
N 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15
BIU3 Pearson Correlation .439 .584(*) .289 .425 .387 .566(*) .480 .650(**) .806(**) 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .102 .022 .296 .115 .154 .028 .070 .009 .000
N 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15
* Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

61
Appendix D: Amazon.com Pearson Correlation Tests

62
 U1 U2 U3 EOU1 EOU2 EOU3 EOU4 BIU1 BIU2 BIU3
U1 Pearson Correlation 1 .923(**) .389 .772(**) .850(**) .483 .903(**) .572(*) .783(**) .751(**)
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .151 .001 .000 .068 .000 .026 .001 .001
N 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15
U2 Pearson Correlation .923(**) 1 .442 .766(**) .876(**) .473 .891(**) .481 .798(**) .718(**)
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .099 .001 .000 .075 .000 .069 .000 .003
N 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15
U3 Pearson Correlation .389 .442 1 .426 .540(*) .231 .408 .627(*) .705(**) .521(*)
Sig. (2-tailed) .151 .099 .113 .038 .408 .132 .012 .003 .047
N 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15
EOU1 Pearson Correlation .772(**) .766(**) .426 1 .817(**) .777(**) .882(**) .379 .633(*) .642(**)
Sig. (2-tailed) .001 .001 .113 .000 .001 .000 .164 .011 .010
N 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15
EOU2 Pearson Correlation .850(**) .876(**) .540(*) .817(**) 1 .666(**) .873(**) .569(*) .794(**) .709(**)
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .038 .000 .007 .000 .027 .000 .003
N 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15
EOU3 Pearson Correlation .483 .473 .231 .777(**) .666(**) 1 .694(**) .231 .331 .436
Sig. (2-tailed) .068 .075 .408 .001 .007 .004 .406 .229 .104
N 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15
EOU4 Pearson Correlation .903(**) .891(**) .408 .882(**) .873(**) .694(**) 1 .471 .670(**) .608(*)
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .132 .000 .000 .004 .076 .006 .016
N 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15
BIU1 Pearson Correlation .572(*) .481 .627(*) .379 .569(*) .231 .471 1 .673(**) .578(*)
Sig. (2-tailed) .026 .069 .012 .164 .027 .406 .076 .006 .024
N 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15
BIU2 Pearson Correlation .783(**) .798(**) .705(**) .633(*) .794(**) .331 .670(**) .673(**) 1 .925(**)
Sig. (2-tailed) .001 .000 .003 .011 .000 .229 .006 .006 .000
N 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15
BIU3 Pearson Correlation .751(**) .718(**) .521(*) .642(**) .709(**) .436 .608(*) .578(*) .925(**) 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .001 .003 .047 .010 .003 .104 .016 .024 .000
N 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15
* Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)

63
Appendix E: Demographic Results

Age Statistics Years

Average Age 39.5
Youngest 17
Oldest 61

Male to Female Ratio

Male
Female

Visual Acuity

completeblind

part ialblind

lowvision

nearsighted

sighted

Internet Use
Browsing 91%
Creating web pages 41%
Email/ IM 100%
Buying Products / services 68%
Selling products / services 32%
Locating product / service
information 82%
Locating personal information 77%
Reading news articles 91%
64
Appendix F: Results from Accessibility Testing
using WebXACT
Priority 1 Checkpoints

Errors
4 tests, 38 instances on page Expand Code Fragments

Guideline Instances Line Numbers

1.1 Provide alternative text for all images. 35 487, 487, 491, 491, 510, 513,
516, 555, 558, 561, 582, 582,
593, 596, 599, 637, 640, 643,
672, 736, 741, 742, 742, 747,
758, 779, 801, 802, 803, 810,
810, 810, 810, 810, 810

12.4 Provide alternative text for all image-type 1 851

buttons in forms.

6.2 Each FRAME must reference an HTML file. 1 765

12.1 Give each frame a title. 1 765

Warnings

12 tests, 192 instances on page Expand Code Fragments

Guideline Instances Line Numbers

1.1 If the submit button is used as an image 3 427, 448, 851

map, use separate buttons for each active
region.

1.1 If an image conveys important information 48 366, 366, 368, 369, 425,
beyond what is in its alternative text, provide 439, 447, 487, 491, 510,
an extended description. 513, 516, 555, 558, 561,
582, 582, 584, 593, 596,
599, 637, 640, 643, 669,
669, 672, 672, 672, 672,
672, 672, 736, 741, 742,
742, 746, 747, 758, 779,
801, 803, 810, 810, 810,
810, 810, 810

2.1 If you use color to convey information, make 65 366, 366, 368, 369, 425,
sure the information is also represented 439, 445, 447, 487, 487,
another way. 487, 491, 491, 491, 510,
513, 516, 534, 555, 558,
561, 582, 582, 583, 584,
586, 593, 596, 599, 627,
637, 640, 643, 665, 669,
669, 671, 672, 672, 672,

65
 Guideline Instances Line Numbers

672, 672, 672, 672, 728,

736, 740, 741, 741, 742,
742, 746, 746, 747, 758,
779, 801, 802, 803, 810,
810, 810, 810, 810, 810

4.1 Identify any changes in the document's

language.

5.1 If this is a data table (not used for layout 14 487, 491, 537, 581, 630,
only), identify headers for the table rows and 668, 673, 796, 805, 810,
columns. 810, 810, 853, 886

5.2 If a table has two or more rows or columns 51 371, 372, 373, 378, 378,
that serve as headers, use structural markup 429, 449, 459, 462, 465,
to identify their hierarchy and relationship. 468, 475, 487, 491, 537,
538, 581, 582, 584, 587,
630, 631, 668, 669, 672,
672, 673, 673, 741, 742,
742, 744, 748, 793, 796,
805, 810, 810, 810, 810,
810, 810, 810, 843, 851,
853, 876, 880, 883, 886, 886

6.1 If style sheets are ignored or unsupported,

ensure that pages are still readable and
usable.

6.3 Provide alternative content for each SCRIPT

that conveys information or functionality.

6.3 Make sure pages are still usable if 3 86, 451, 782
programmatic objects do not function.

7.1 Make sure that the page does not cause

the screen to flicker rapidly.

8.1 Provide accessible alternatives to the 3 86, 451, 782

information in scripts, applets, or objects.

14.1 Use the simplest and most straightforward

language that is possible.

Collapse Section |Top of Page

Priority 2 Checkpoints

Errors
6 tests, 112 instances on page

Guideline Instances Line Numbers

66
 Guideline Instances Line Numbers

3.2 Use a public text identifier in a

DOCTYPE statement.

3.4 Use relative sizing and positioning , 63 366, 366, 366, 366, 366,
rather than absolute. 368, 376, 378, 378, 378,
378, 378, 378, 382, 390,
421, 422, 426, 435, 445,
446, 448, 479, 485, 487,
489, 491, 672, 672, 672,
672, 672, 672, 672, 672,
672, 672, 672, 672, 672,
672, 673, 673, 673, 673,
675, 752, 765, 765, 800,
801, 802, 803, 810, 810,
810, 810, 810, 810, 810,
810, 810, 810

9.3 Make sure event handlers do not require 5 445, 608, 615, 622, 665
use of a mouse.

12.4 Explicitly associate form controls and 5 390, 424, 447, 849, 850
their labels with the LABEL element.

13.1 Create link phrases that make sense 28 510, 513, 516, 555, 558,
when read out of context. 561, 582, 582, 593, 596,
599, 637, 640, 643, 672,
736, 741, 742, 742, 747,
780, 810, 810, 810, 810,
810, 810, 839

13.1 Do not use the same link phrase more 10 487, 487, 491, 615, 622,
than once when the links point to different 627, 827, 882, 882, 884
URLs.
Warnings

23 tests, 196 instances on page Expand Code Fragments

Guideline Instances Line Numbers

2.2 Check that the foreground and 65 366, 366, 368, 369, 425,
background colors contrast sufficiently 439, 445, 447, 487, 487,
with each other. 487, 491, 491, 491, 510,
513, 516, 534, 555, 558,
561, 582, 582, 583, 584,
586, 593, 596, 599, 627,
637, 640, 643, 665, 669,
669, 671, 672, 672, 672,
672, 672, 672, 672, 728,
736, 740, 741, 741, 742,
742, 746, 746, 747, 758,
779, 801, 802, 803, 810,

67
 Guideline Instances Line Numbers

810, 810, 810, 810, 810

3.1 Where it's possible to mark up content

instead of using images, use a
markup language.

3.2 Make sure your document validates to

formal published grammars.

3.5 Make sure header elements are not

used only for bold text.

3.7 Mark up any quotations with the Q

and BLOCKQUOTE elements.

5.3 Avoid using tables to format text

documents in columns unless the
table can be linearized.

5.5 If this is a data table (not used for layout 51 371, 372, 373, 378, 378,
only), provide a caption. 429, 449, 459, 462, 465,
468, 475, 487, 491, 537,
538, 581, 582, 584, 587,
630, 631, 668, 669, 672,
672, 673, 673, 741, 742,
742, 744, 748, 793, 796,
805, 810, 810, 810, 810,
810, 810, 810, 843, 851,
853, 876, 880, 883, 886, 886

6.4 If objects use event handlers, make sure

they do not require use of a mouse.

7.2 If this .gif image is animated, make sure 34 366, 366, 368, 369, 425,
it does not contain fast or distracting 427, 439, 445, 447, 448,
motion. 487, 487, 491, 491, 672,
672, 672, 672, 672, 672,
728, 742, 747, 758, 801,
802, 803, 810, 810, 810,
810, 810, 810, 851

9.2 Make sure that all elements that have 3 86, 451, 782
their own interface are operable without
a mouse.

10.1 Inform the user that clicking on certain 6 443, 608, 615, 622, 665, 778
links or areas of a window will open pop-
up windows or change the active
window.

10.1 If scripts create pop-up windows or 3 86, 451, 782

change the active window, make sure

68
 Guideline Instances Line Numbers

that the user is aware this is happening.

10.2 Make sure that labels of all form

controls are properly placed.

11.1 Use the latest technology specification

available whenever possible.

11.2 Avoid use of obsolete language features 16 471, 534, 583, 584, 586,
if possible. 587, 627, 665, 671, 672,
672, 740, 741, 742, 746, 887

12.2 Add a description to a frame if the TITLE 1 765

does not describe its contents.

12.3 Consider grouping long lists of 2 420, 849

selections into a hierarchy.

12.3 If there are logical groupings of form 2 386, 818

controls, use FIELDSET with LEGEND
on each group.

12.3 Group related elements when possible.

13.1 Make sure that all link phrases make

sense when read out of context.

13.1 Add a descriptive title to links

when needed.

13.3 Provide the user with a site map or

table of contents , a description of the
general layout of the site, the access
features used, and instructions on how
to use them.

13.4 Provide a clear, consistent

navigation structure.

Collapse Section |Top of Page

Priority 3 Checkpoints

Errors
4 tests, 130 instances on page Expand Code Fragments

Guideline Instances Line Numbers

4.3 Identify the 1 4

language of the
text.

69
 Guideline Instances Line Numbers
5.5 Provide a 51 363, 360, 359, 378, 378, 387, 444, 436, 433, 380,

summary for 374, 469, 485, 489, 507, 504, 541, 538, 582, 584,
tables. 590, 587, 634, 631, 669, 672, 672, 672, 733, 741,
742, 742, 747, 762, 752, 477, 810, 810, 810, 810,
810, 810, 810, 821, 847, 819, 873, 876, 880, 883,
873
10.4 Include default, 4 424, 447, 849, 850

place-holding
characters in edit
boxes and text
areas.
10.5 Separate adjacent 74 366, 487, 487, 487, 487, 487, 487, 487, 487, 487,

links with more 487, 487, 487, 487, 487, 487, 487, 487, 487, 487,
than whitespace. 487, 487, 487, 487, 487, 487, 487, 487, 487, 487,
487, 487, 487, 487, 487, 487, 487, 487, 491, 491,
491, 491, 491, 491, 491, 491, 491, 491, 491, 491,
513, 516, 529, 558, 561, 582, 596, 599, 640, 643,
669, 672, 672, 672, 672, 672, 672, 673, 673, 728,
810, 810, 810, 810
Warnings

12 tests, 12 instances on page

Guideline Instances Line Numbers

4.2 Use the ABBR and ACRONYM elements to denote and

expand any abbreviations and acronyms that are present.

9.4 Consider specifying a logical tab order among form

controls, links, and objects.

9.5 Consider adding keyboard shortcuts to frequently used links.

9.5 Consider furnishing keyboard shortcuts for form elements. 11.3

Allow users to customize their experience of the web page.

13.5 Provide navigation bars for easy access to the navigation

structure.

13.6 If there are logical groups of links, make sure they are
clearly identified.

13.6 If you have grouped links, make sure there is a link at the
beginning that allows the user to bypass the group.

13.7 If there is a search feature, provide different types of

searches for different skill levels and preferences.

70
 Guideline Instances Line Numbers

13.8 Provide distinguishing information at the beginning

of headings, paragraphs, lists, etc.

13.9 If this document is part of a collection, provide metadata that

identifies this document's location in the collection.

14.3 Use a consistent style of presentation between pages.

Custom Accessibility Standards

Watchfire WebXM and WebQA can identify pages that do not meet custom accessibility
standards (learn more)

71
Appendix G: Screenshots of Survey

72
Step 1

73
Step 2

74
Step 3

75
Step 4

76
Step 5

77
Step 6

78
Step 7

79
Step 8

80
Appendix H: Recording Industry Association of America
Year-End Statistics (2005)

81
 2005 Year-End Statistics
1330 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 300, Washington, D.C. 20036
202-775-0101
Manufacturers' Unit Shipments and Retail Dollar Value
(In Millions, net after returns)
Physical
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 % CHANGE 2002 % CHANGE 2003 % CHANGE 2004 % CHANGE 2005 % CHANGE
2000-2001 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 2004-2005
(Units Shipped) CD1 722.9 778.9 753.1 847.0 938.9 942.5 881.9 -6.4% 803.3 -8.9% 746.0 -7.1% 767.0 2.8% 705.4 -8.0%
(Dollar Value) 9,377.4 9,934.7 9,915.1 11,416.0 12,816.3 13,214.5 12,909.4 -2.3% 12,044.1 -6.7% 11,232.9 -6.7% 11446.5 1.9% 10,520.2 -8.1%
CD Single 21.5 43.2 66.7 56.0 55.9 34.2 17.3 -49.4% 4.5 -74.1% 8.3 84.5% 3.1 -62.2% 2.8 -12.1%
110.9 184.1 272.7 213.2 222.4 142.7 79.4 -44.4% 19.6 -75.4% 36.0 83.6% 14.982 -58.4% 10.9 -27.0%
Cassette 272.6 225.3 172.6 158.5 123.6 76.0 45.0 -40.8% 31.1 -30.9% 17.2 -44.7% 5.2 -69.6% 2.5 -52.6%
2,303.6 1,905.3 1,522.7 1,419.9 1,061.6 626.0 363.4 -41.9% 209.8 -42.3% 108.1 -48.5% 23.7 -78.1% 13.1 -44.9%
Cassette Single2 70.7 59.9 42.2 26.4 14.2 1.3 -1.5 -215.4% -0.5 -68.0% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
236.3 189.3 133.5 94.4 48.0 4.6 -5.3 -215.2% -1.6 -70.3% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
LP/EP 2.2 2.9 2.7 3.4 2.9 2.2 2.3 4.5% 1.7 -23.7% 1.5 -11.5% 1.36 -11.9% 1.02 -25.0%
25.1 36.8 33.3 34.0 31.8 27.7 27.4 -1.1% 20.5 -25.2% 21.7 6.0% 19.286 -11.3% 14.2 -26.2%
Vinyl Single 10.2 10.1 7.5 5.4 5.3 4.8 5.5 14.6% 4.4 -20.8% 3.8 -14.0% 3.5 -7.3% 2.3 -35.4%
46.7 47.5 35.6 25.7 27.9 26.3 31.4 19.4% 24.9 -20.6% 21.5 -13.8% 19.9 -7.3% 13.2 -33.4%
Music Video 12.6 16.9 18.6 27.2 19.8 18.2 17.7 -2.7% 14.7 -17.2% 19.9 35.2% 32.8 65.0% 33.8 3.2%
220.3 236.1 323.9 508.0 376.7 281.9 329.2 16.8% 288.4 -12.4% 399.9 38.7% 607.2 51.8% 602.2 -0.8%
DVD Audio - - - - - - 0.3 N/A 0.4 63.8% 0.4 1.2% 0.3 -20.5% 0.5 31.8%
- - - - - - 6.0 N/A 8.5 41.3% 8.0 -5.5% 6.5 -19.2% 11.2 72.2%
SACD - - - - - - - - - - 1.3 N/A 0.8 -39.7% 0.5 -40.5%
- - - - - - - - - - 26.3 N/A 16.6 -36.9% 10.0 -39.9%
DVD Video3 - - - 0.5 2.5 3.3 7.9 139.4% 10.7 34.8% 17.5 63.3% 29.0 66.0% 27.8 -4.1%
- - - 12.2 66.3 80.3 190.7 137.5% 236.3 23.9% 369.6 56.4% 561.0 51.8% 539.8 -3.8%
Total Units 1112.7 1137.2 1063.4 1123.9 1160.6 1079.2 968.5 -10.3% 859.7 -11.2% 798.4 -7.1% 814.1 2.0% 748.7 -8.0%
Total Value 12320.3 12533.8 12236.8 13711.2 14584.7 14323.7 13740.9 -4.1% 12614.2 -8.2% 11854.4 -6.0% 12154.7 2.5% 11195.0 -7.9%
Total Retail Units 817.5 850.0 869.7 788.6 733.1 -7.0% 675.7 -7.8% 658.2 -2.6% 687.0 4.4% 634.8 -7.6%
Total Retail Value 10,785.8 12,165.4 13,048.0 12,705.0 12,388.8 -2.5% 11,549.0 -6.8% 11,053.4 -4.3% 11,423.0 3.3% 10,477.5 -8.3%
Digital
Download Single - - - - - - - - - - - - 139.4 N/A 366.9 163.3%
- - - - - - - - - - - - 138.0 N/A 363.3 163.3%
Download Album - - - - - - - - - - - - 4.6 N/A 13.6 198.5%
- - - - - - - - - - - - 45.5 N/A 135.7 198.5%
Kiosk4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 0.7 N/A
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1.0 N/A
Music Video - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1.9 N/A
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3.7 N/A
Total Units - - - - - - - - - - - 143.9 N/A 383.1 166.2%
Total Value - - - - - - - - - - - 183.4 N/A 503.6 174.5%

Mobile5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 170.0 N/A

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 421.6 N/A
-
Subscription6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1.3 N/A
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 149.2 N/A
Total Digital & Physical
Total Units7 1,112.7 1,137.2 1,063.4 1,123.9 1,160.6 1,079.2 968.5 -10.3% 859.7 -11.2% 798.4 -7.1% 958.0 20.0% 1,301.8 35.9%
Total Value 12,320.3 12,533.8 12,236.8 13,711.2 14,584.7 14,323.7 13,740.9 -4.1% 12,614.2 -8.2% 11,854.4 -6.0% 12,338.1 4.1% 12,269.5 -0.6%
Retail value is value of shipments at recommended or estimated list price Permission to cite or copy these statistics is hereby granted, as long as proper
attribution is given to the Recording Industry Association of America.
1
Includes DualDisc
2
RIAA's reports will no longer reflect shipments of cassette singles
3
While broken out for this chart, DVD Video Product is included in the Music Video totals
4
Includes Singles and Albums
5
Includes Master Ringtunes, Ringbacks, Music Videos, Full Length Downloads, and Other Mobile
6
Weighted Annual Average
7
Units does not include subscriptions