Web accessibility evaluation guidelines, methods, and tools:
a bibliometric analysis and literature review
Keywords:
Online accessibility, Word Wide Web consortium, Disability, Web content accessibility guidelines, Scientific productionAbstract
The purpose of this work is to present a bibliometric analysis about the guidelines, methods, techniques, and automatic tools for web accessibility evaluation in the scientific production indexed in Web of Science and Scopus. In order to establish an approximation on the evolution and general features of scientific production on this topic, we analyzed the totality of the production registered in the main collection of Web of Science and Scopus up to the year 2024, a total of 403 records, considering productivity indicators, visibility and impact indicators, and collaboration indicators. In addition, we analyzed abstracts, titles and authors’ keywords. Main results showed that web accessibility evaluation methods contemplated the need to combine manual inspection and automatic evaluation tools. However, the most used method has been automatic evaluation tools. Results also shown a high percentage in the dissemination of scientific production on this topic in academic and scientific events, under the authorship and academic institutions majority from the United States, Spain and United Kingdom, and publishers mostly from the United States. These results show the growing interest in a relatively new research topic centered in a geographic area with a prominent role in the study of this discipline at a scientific level.
Downloads
References
Acosta, T. et al. Accessibility of eGovernment Services in Latin America. In: International Conference on eDemocracy & eGovernment, 4., 2018, Ambato. Proceedings [...]. Ambato: IEEE, 2018. p. 67-74.
Acosta-Vargas, P. et al. Improving web accessibility: Evaluation and analysis of a telerehabilitation platform for hip arthroplasty patients. In: Nunes, I. (ed.). Advances in human factors and systems interaction. AHFE 2019. Cham: Springer, 2020 (Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, v. 959). Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20040-4_46.
Badzio, B. et al. Analysis of the usability and accessibility of websites in view of their universal design principles. ACS, v. 18, n. 3, p. 63-85, 2022. Doi: https://doi.org/10.35784/acs-2022-22.
Clegg-Vinell, R.; Bailey, C.; Gkatzidou, V. Investigating the appropriateness and relevance of mobile web accessibility guidelines. In: W4A ‘14: International Web for All Conference, 2014, Seoul. Proceedings [...]. Seoul: ACM, 2014. p. 1-4.
Delgado López-Cózar, E.; Repiso, R. The impact of communication journals: comparing Google Scholar Metrics, Web of Science and Scopus. Comunicar, v. 21, n. 41, p. 45-52, 2013. Doi: https://doi.org/10.3916/C41-2013-04.
Granda-Orive, J.I. et al. Some advantages of Scopus over Web of Science in a bibliometric analysis on smoking. Spanish J. of Scientific Documentation, v. 36, n. 2, p. 1-9, 2013. Doi: https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2013.2.941.
Guallar, J. et al. Spanish journals of Documentation in Web of Science: bibliometric analysis and thematic evolution from 2015 to 2019. EPI, v. 29, n. 6, p. 1-27, 2020. Doi: https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2020.nov.06.
Hambley, A. et al. Web structure derived clustering for optimized web accessibility evaluation. In: WWW ‘23: The ACM Web Conference, 2023, Texas. Proceedings [...]. Texas: ACM, 2023. p. 1345-1354.
Hassanzadeh, M.; Navidi, F. Web site accessibility evaluation methods in action: A comparative approach for ministerial web sites in Iran. The Electronic Library, v. 28 n. 6, p. 789-803, 2010. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/02640471011093499.
Hernández-González, V. et al. Comparison between Web of Science and Scopus: Bibliometric study of anatomy and morphology journals. International Journal of Morphology, v. 34, n. 4, p. 1369-1377, 2016. Doi: https://doi.org/10.4067/S0717-95022016000400032.
Kollotzek, G. et al. Comparison of manual evaluation methods for assessing the accessibility of websites based on EN 301 549. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Computer-Human Interaction Research and Applications, 10., 2021, Malta. Proceedings [...]. Malta: INSTICC, 2021. p. 24-35.
Kous, K. et al. Investigation of the accessibility of non-text content published on websites. In: International Convention on Information, Communication and Electronic Technology (MIPRO), 43., 2020, Opatija. Proceedings [...]. Opatija: IEEE, 2020. P. 1645-1650.
Londoño-Rojas, L.F. et al. AET tool for hybrid accessibility evaluation. Universal Access in the Information Society, v. 22, n. 2, p. 655-661, 2023. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-021-00846-8.
Nietzio, A. et al. (2008). The Unified Web Evaluation Methodology (UWEM) 1.2 for WCAG 1.0. In: Miesenberger, K. et al. (ed.) Computers Helping People with Special Needs. ICCHP 2008. Berlin: Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-70540-6_57.
Pérez-Escoda, A. WoS and Scopus: the great partners of every researcher. Comunicar, v. 9, n. 1, p. 1-12, 2017. Doi: https://doi.org/10.3916/escuela-de-autores-031
Power, C. et al. Guidelines are only half of the story: Accessibility problems encountered by blind users on the Web. In: CHI ‘12: CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 2012, Austin. Proceedings [...]. Austin: ACM, 2012. p. 433-442.
Pritchard, A. Statistical bibliography or Bibliometrics. Journal of Documentation, v. 25, n. 4, p. 348-369, 1969.
Raia, M.L. et al. The educational computational thinking game with accessibility for hearing-impaired children. In: Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI), 18., 2023, Aveiro. Proceedings [...]. Aveiro, 2023. p. 1-6.
Revilla Muñoz, O.; Carreras Montoto, O. WCAG 2 made easy. Madrid: Itakora Press, 2024.
Salazar-Botello, C.M. et al. Evolution of service learning: a bibliometric analysis from the Web of Science. Libraries Journal Annual of Research, v. 19, n. 1, p. 17-13, 2023
Sarita, K. et al. Accessibility of healthcare sites: Evaluation by automated tools. In: Saraswat, M. et al. (ed.). Proceedings of International Conference on Data Science and Applications: ICDSA 2021. Singapore: Springer, 2021. p. 625-636 (Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, v. 287). Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-5348-3_50.
Takagi, H. et al. Accessibility designer: Visualizing usability for the blind. In: International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility, 6., 2004, Atlanta. Proceedings [...]. Atlanta: ACM, 2004. p. 177-184.
Vigo, M. et al. Benchmarking web accessibility evaluation tools: Measuring the harm of sole reliance on automated tests. In: W4A ‘13: International Cross-Disciplinary Conference on Web Accessibility, 2013, Rio de Janeiro. Proceedings [...]. Rio de Janeiro: Web4All Conference, 2013. p. 1-10.
Web Accessibility Initiative (W3C). Evaluating Web Accessibility overview. [S. l.]: Word Wide Web Consortium, 2023. Available from: https://www.w3.org/WAI/test-evaluate/es/. Cited: 2024 Nov. 18.
Web Accessibility Initiative (W3C). Making the Web Accessible: Strategies, standards, and supporting resources to help you make the Web more accessible to people with disabilities. [S. l.]: World Wide Web Consortium, 2024a. Available from: https://www.w3.org/WAI/. Cited: 2024 Nov. 18.
Web Accessibility Initiative (W3C). W3C Accessibility Standards overview. [S. l.]: World Wide Web Consortium, 2024b. Available from: https://www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guidelines/. Cited: 2024 Nov. 18.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Transinformação
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
