nach oben

Universal Access in the Information Society

Erschienen in:

01.06.2016 | Long paper

e-Government in Rhode Island: what effects do templates have on usability, accessibility, and mobile readiness?

verfasst von: Robert Anthony Galvez, Norman E. Youngblood

Erschienen in: Universal Access in the Information Society | Ausgabe 2/2016

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

This study examines state and local e-government Web sites in Rhode Island with an eye toward determining the effects of templates on accessibility, usability, and mobile readiness. After examining 132 state and local e-government sites, using a combination of code inspection, heuristic evaluation, and automated analysis, the researchers found that templates had, at best, mixed success in promoting these key issues. The results suggest that while best practice-based templates may be helpful in improving usability, accessibility, and mobile readiness, it is critical that designers at the local level receive training in these areas and that governments monitor state and local Web sites for compliance with industry and legal standards.

Vorheriger Artikel Predicting older adults’ perceptions about a computer system designed for seniors

Nächster Artikel Evaluation of web accessibility in China: changes from 2009 to 2013

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Huang, Z., Brooks, L., Chen, S.: The assessment of credibility of e-government: users’ perspective. In: Salvendy, G., Smith, M.J. (eds.) Human Interface and the Management of Information: Information and Interaction, vol. 5618, pp. 26–35. Springer, Berlin (2009). Retrieved from http://www.springerlink.com/content/1741260x54246247/

Ho, A.T.: Reinventing local governments and the e-government initiative. Pub. Adm. Rev. 62(4), 434–444 (2002)CrossRef

Huang, Z.: E-Government practices at local levels: an analysis of U.S. counties’ websites. Issues Inf. Syst. 7(2), 165–170 (2006)

Evans-Cowley, J.S.: The accessibility of municipal government websites. J. E-Gov. 2(2), 75–90 (2006)

Youngblood, N.E., Mackiewicz, J.: A usability analysis of municipal government website home pages in Alabama. Gov. Inf. Q. 28(4), 582–588 (2012)CrossRef

Zickuhr, K.: Tablet Ownership. Pew Internet and American Life Project, pp. 1–11. Pew Research Center, Washington, DC (2013). Retrieved June 13, 2013, from http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2013/Tablet-Ownership-2013.aspx

Smith, A.: Smartphone Ownership. Pew Internet and American Life Project, pp. 1–12. Pew Research Center, Washington D.C. (2013). Retrieved June 13, 2013, from http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2013/Smartphone-Ownership-2013.aspx

West, D.M.: State and Federal Electronic Government in the United States, 2008. The Brookings Institution, Washington D.C. (2008). Retrieved September 2011 from http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/research/files/reports/2008/8/26%20egovernment%20west/0826_egovernment_west.pdf

Cappel, J.J., Huang, Z.: A usability analysis of company websites. J. Comput. Inf. Syst. 48(1), 117–123 (2007)

10.

Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 794d

11.

W3C (2008) Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0. Retrieved June 13, 2012, from http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG

12.

Palazzolo, J.: Disabled sue over web shopping—advocates for blind, deaf say netflix, target are legally obligated to make sites easier to navigate. Wall Str J (2013). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1318674888?accountid=8421

13.

U.S. Access Board: 2011 ANPRM Draft (2011). Retrieved August 8, 2012 from http://access-board.gov/sec508/refresh/draft-rule.htm

14.

Jaeger, P.T.: Assessing section 508 compliance on federal e-government Web sites: a multi-method, user-centered evaluation of accessibility for persons with disabilities. Gov. Inf. Q. 23(2), 169–190 (2006)CrossRef

15.

Olalere, A., Lazar, J.: Accessibility of US federal government home pages: section 508 compliance and site accessibility statements. Gov. Inf. Q. 28(3), 303–309 (2011). doi:10.1016/j.giq.2011.02.002 CrossRef

16.

Fagan, J.C., Fagan, B.: An accessibility study of state legislative web sites. Gov. Inf. Q. 21(1), 65–85 (2004)CrossRef

17.

Potter, A.: Accessibility of Alabama government web sites. J. Gov. Inf. 29(5), 303–317 (2002)MathSciNet

18.

Lazar, J., et al.: A longitudinal study of state government homepage accessibility in Maryland and the role of web page templates for improving accessibility. Gov. Inf. Q. 30(3), 289–299 (2013)CrossRef

19.

Cassell, M.K., Mullaly, S.: When smaller governments open the window: a study of web site creation, adoption, and presence among smaller local governments in northeast Ohio. State Local Gov. Rev. 44(2), 91–100 (2012)CrossRef

20.

Scott, J.K.: Assessing the quality of municipal government web sites. State Local Gov. Rev. 37(2), 151–165 (2005)CrossRef

21.

Smith, A.: Americans and Their Cell Phones: Mobile Devices Help People Solve Problems and Stave Off Boredom, but Create Some New Challenges and Annoyances. Pew Internet and American Life Project, pp. 1–19. Pew Research Center, Washington D.C. (2011). Retrieved November 12, 2012, from http://www.pewinternet.org/~/media//Files/Reports/2011/Cell%20Phones%202011.pdf

22.

Bertot, J.C., Jaeger, P.T.: User-centered e-government: challenges and benefits for government web sites. Gov. Inf. Q. 23(2), 163–168 (2006)CrossRef

23.

Fogg, B. J., Soohoo. C., Danielson, D. R., Marable, L., Stanford, J., Tauber, E. R.: How do users evaluate the credibility of Web sites?: a study with over 2,500 participants. In: Proceedings of the 2003 Conference on Designing for User Experiences, pp. 1–15. ACM, New York (2003)

24.

Robins, D., Holmes, J.: Aesthetics and credibility in web site design. Inf. Process. Manag. 44(1), 386–399 (2008)CrossRef

25.

Sicilia, M., Pérez, R., Heffernan, T.: How do EU cities utilise their websites? A content analysis and suggestions for improvement. J. Internet Bus. 5, 2–26 (2008)

26.

Grodach, C.: Urban branding: an analysis of city homepage imagery. J. Archit. Plan Res. 26(3), 181 (2009)

27.

Pew Center on the States: Being Online Is Not Enough: State Elections Websites. The Pew Charitable Trusts, Washington (2008)

28.

Nielsen, J., Tahir, M.: Homepage Usability: 50 Websites Deconstructed. New Riders, Berkeley (2002)

29.

Leavitt, M.O., Shneiderman, B.: Research-Based Web Design & Usability Guidelines. US Department of Health and Human Services, Washington (2006)

30.

DeWitt, A.J.: Examining the order effect of website navigation menus with eye tracking. J. Usability Stud. 6(1), 39–47 (2010)

31.

Youngblood, N.E., Youngblood, S.A.: User experience and accessibility: an analysis of county web portals. J. Usability Stud. 9(1), 25–41 (2013)

32.

W3C: World Wide Web Consortium launches international program office for web accessibility initiative (1997). Retrieved May 15, 2013, from http://www.w3.org/Press/IPO-announce.html

33.

Fichten, C.S., Ferraro, V., Asuncion, J.V., Chwojka, C., Barile, M., Nguyen, M.N., Klomp, R., Wolforth, J.: Disabilities and e-learning problems and solutions: an exploratory study. Educ. Technol. Soc. 12(4), 241–256 (2009)

34.

Gilbertson, T.D., Machin, C.H.C.: Guidelines, icons and marketable skills: an accessibility evaluation of 100 web development company homepages. In: Proceedings of the International Cross-Disciplinary Conference on Web Accessibility (W4A ‘12). ACM, New York, Article 17, p. 4 (2012). doi:10.1145/2207016.2207024

35.

Loiacono, E., Romano, N., McCoy, S.: The state of corporate website accessibility. Commun. ACM 52(9), 128–132 (2009)CrossRef

36.

Isa, W.A.R.W.M., Aziz, M.A., Razak, M.R.B.A.: Evaluating the accessibility of Small and Medium Enterprise (SME) websites in Malaysia. In: 2011 International Conference on User Science and Engineering (i-USEr). IEEE, pp. 135–140 (2011)

37.

Lazar, J., Olalere, A., Wentz, B.: Investigating the accessibility and usability of job application Web sites for blind users. J. Usability Stud. 7(2), 68–87 (2012)

38.

Gutierrez, C.F., Loucopoulos, C., Reinsch, R.W.: Disability-accessibility of airlines’ Web sites for US reservations online. J. Air Transp. Manag. 11(4), 239–247 (2005)CrossRef

39.

Yu, D.X., Parmanto, B.: US state government websites demonstrate better in terms of accessibility compared to federal government and commercial websites. Gov. Inf. Q. 28(4), 484–490 (2011). doi:10.1016/j.giq.2011.04.001 CrossRef

40.

US Census Bureau.: American Community Survey, 2008 (nd). Retrieved June 10, 2012 from http://factfinder2.census.gov

41.

Zickuhr, K., Smith, A.: Digital differences. Pew Internet & American Life Project (2012). Retrieved May 20, 2013, from http://www.pewinternet.org/~/media//Files/Reports/2012/PIP_Digital_differences_041312.pdf

42.

W3C: Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 (1999). Retrieved July 5, 2012, from http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10/

43.

Federal Communications Commission, Twenty-First Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act (CVAA). Retrieved January 21, 2014 from http://www.fcc.gov/guides/21st-century-communications-and-video-accessibility-act-2010

44.

Americans with Disabilities Act, Title II, pt.35 § 35.190 (2010). Retrieved July 6, 2013 from http://www.ada.gov/regs2010/titleII_2010/titleII_2010_regulations.htm#a35161

45.

Georgia Tech Research Institute: TRI | ELSYS | Human Systems Engineering Branch | Overview of State Accessibility Laws, Policies, Standards and Other Resources Available On-line (2009). Retrieved July 18, 2013 from http://accessibility.gtri.gatech.edu/sitid/stateLawAtGlance.php

46.

West, D.M.: State and federal e-government in the United States, 2002 (2002). Retrieved June 4, 2012 from http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt02us.pdf

47.

West, D.M.: State and federal e-government in the United States, 2006. Taubman Center for Public Policy, Brown University (2006). Retrieved October 11, 2011, from http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt06us.pdf

48.

Loiacono, E., McCoy, S., Chin, W.: Federal website accessibility for people with disabilities. Inf. Technol. Prof. 7(1), 27–31 (2005)

49.

Hackett, S., Parmanto, B., Zeng, X.: Accessibility of Internet websites through time. In: ACM SIGACCESS Accessibility and Computing 77–78:32–39. ACM, New York (2004)

50.

Hanson, V.L., Richards, J.T.: Progress on website accessibility? ACM Trans. Web (TWEB) 7(1), 2 (2013)

51.

Goette, T., Collier, C., White, J.D.: An exploratory study of the accessibility of state government’s. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 5(1), 41–50 (2006). doi:10.1007/s10209-006-0023-2 CrossRef

52.

Rubaii-Barrett, N., Wise, L.R.: Disability access and E-government an empirical analysis of state practices. J. Disabil. Policy Stud. 19(1), 52–64 (2008)CrossRef

53.

Loiacono, E.T., Djamasbi, S.: Corporate website accessibility: does legislation matter? Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 12(1), 115–124 (2013). doi:10.1007/s10209-011-0269-1 CrossRef

54.

Youngblood, N.E.: Revisiting Alabama website accessibility. Gov. Inf. Q. 31(3), 476–487 (2014). doi: 10.1016/j.giq.2014.02.007

55.

West, D.M.: State and federal e-government in the United States, 2003 (2003). Retrieved August 20, 2013 from http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt03us.pdf

56.

Fuglerud, K., Røssvoll, T.: An evaluation of web-based voting usability and accessibility. Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 11(4), 1–15 (2011). doi:10.1007/s10209-011-0253-9

57.

ATRC.: AChecker: IDI web accessibility checker (nd). Retrieved August 20, 2012, from http://atutor.ca/achecker/

58.

Gay, G., Li, C.Q.: AChecker: open, interactive, customizable, web accessibility checking. In: Proceedings of the 2010 International Cross Disciplinary Conference on Web Accessibility (W4A) (W4A ‘10), pp. 2. ACM, New York (2010). Article 23. doi:10.1145/1805986.1806019

59.

Kushchu, I., Kuscu, H.: From E-government to M-government: facing the inevitable. In: The 3rd European Conference on e-Government, pp. 253–260 (2003)

60.

Eom, S.J., Lee, M.Y., Kim, J.H.: The development of public smart phone apps in Korea: empirical approach. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance, pp. 105–108 (2012)

61.

Smith, A.: Mobile Access 2010. Pew Internet and American Life Project. Pew Research Center, Washington DC, pp. 1–9 (2010). Retrieved November 27, 2013, from http://www.pewinternet.org/~/media//Files/Reports/2010/PIP_Mobile_Access_2010.pdf

62.

Duggan, M., Rainie, L.: Cell Phone Activities 2012. Pew Internet and American Life Project, pp. 1–12. Pew Research Center, Washington DC (2012). Retrieved July 22, 2013 from http://www.pewinternet.org/~/media//Files/Reports/2012/PIP_CellActivities_11.25.pdf

63.

NIC.: NIC’s eGovernment Partnership—Rhode Island (2011). Retrieved November 25, 2013 from http://www.egov.com/Partners/Pages/RhodeIsland.aspx

64.

Moon, M. J.: State government e-procurement in the information age: issues, practices and trends. In: E-Government 2003, pp. 177–235 (2003)

65.

NIC.: About NIC (EGOV) and eGovernment Solutions | NIC (nd). Retrieved November 25, 2013, from http://www.egov.com/AboutNIC/Pages/default.aspx

66.

NIC: RI.gov Maintains Fourth Place Ranking in the Center for Digital Government’s Best of the Web (2012). Retrieved November 25, 2013, from http://www.egov.com/Media/PR/Pages/ViewRelease.aspx?PR_ID=20120830005134

67.

State of Rhode Island.: RI.gov: Design (2013). Retrieved November 25, 2013 from http://www.ri.gov/design

68.

State of Rhode Island.: RI.gov: Webmakers Resource: Accessibility (2013). Retrieved November 26, 2013, from http://www.ri.gov/resource/accessibility/

69.

State of Rhode Island.: RI.gov: Accessibility Policy (2013). Retrieved November 26, 2013, from http://www.ri.gov/policies/access.php

70.

State of Rhode Island.: RI.gov: Accessibility Checklist (2013). Retrieved November 26, 2013, from http://www.ri.gov/policies/access/checklist/

71.

State of Rhode Island: RI.gov: Contact Us (February 2, 2002). Retrieved November 26, 2013, from https://web.archive.org/web/20020201192202/http://www.ri.gov/accessable/index.html

72.

State of Vermont: Vermont.gov—Policies—Accessibility Policy (2013). Retrieved July 18, 2013 from http://www.vermont.gov/portal/policies/accessibility.php

73.

West, D.M.: State and federal e-government in the United States, 2001 (2001). Retrieved August 20, 2013 from http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt01us.PDF

74.

West, D.M.: State and federal e-government in the United States, 2004 (2004). Retrieved August 20, 2013 from http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt04us.pdf

75.

West, D.M. State and federal e-government in the United States, 2005 (2005). Retrieved August 20, 2013 from http://www.insidepolitics.org/egovt05us.pdf

76.

State of Rhode Island.: RI.gov: Awards (2013). Retrieved November 27, 2013, from https://www.ri.gov/about/awards.php

77.

State of Rhode Island: RI Government Info: A-Z Agencies List (May 9, 2008). Retrieved August 1, 2013, from http://www.info.ri.gov/browse.php?choice=show_az&letter=a

78.

ATRC: IDI web accessibility checker: web accessibility checker (2009). Retrieved August 20, 2012, from http://achecker.ca/

Titel: e-Government in Rhode Island: what effects do templates have on usability, accessibility, and mobile readiness?
verfasst von: Robert Anthony Galvez
Norman E. Youngblood
Publikationsdatum: 01.06.2016
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: Universal Access in the Information Society / Ausgabe 2/2016
Print ISSN: 1615-5289
Elektronische ISSN: 1615-5297
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-014-0384-x

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2016

Older adults fail to see the periphery in a Web site task

Evaluation of web accessibility in China: changes from 2009 to 2013

Rethinking universal accessibility: a broader approach considering the digital gap

Web accessibility implementation in private sector organizations: motivations and business impact

Establishing a social entrepreneurial system to bridge the digital divide for the poor: a case study for Taiwan

Increasing participation in the information society by people with disabilities and their families in lower-income countries using mainstream technologies