We discussed earlier the difficulties encountered finding suitable research participants. Again, the issue of the language of disability also became a feature in defining target groups. Our starting position was that we required impaired people who used assistive equipment to access the internet to join our project. However, we found that not only did some people resist the label of ‘disabled’ as a defining characteristic; some also resisted admitting having an impairment. This was noticeably the case for two participants who classified themselves as not disabled, without an impairment, but with a form of dyslexia. The following example illustrates this point and was taken from an informal discussion where the issue of definitions was under consideration.
This extract illustrates some of the problematic issues which arise if simplistic dualisms are used in relation to disability research. This issue has been analysed in recent years academically through disability discourses (Shakespeare1998). For some time, people with severe hearing impairments have argued that the language of disability is not necessarily appropriate (Corker 1996; 1998). For some authors including Corker, deafness is not necessarily a disability, rather the inability to have sign language recognised as an alternative to spoken and written English is what causes oppression and disability to many in the deaf community (ibid). Hence this research in attempting to include the widest demographic population of user testers has included some people who do not define themselves as disabled or impaired, but who do have difficulties accessing internet resources. The two other groups of participants originally intended to inform the research were private and public sector organisations where again engagement was sometimes problematic. In total 11 organisations were interviewed although as will be discussed below, one private sector organisation was interviewed twice after conducting some accessibility work. Hence in total 12 interviews were obtained.
In total 6 public sector organisations were interviewed for the project. This limited response was clearly differentiated between local authorities and other bodies. Some, including Greater Manchester police quickly responded to our request for interviews and were extremely cooperative with their time. The organisation had made significant steps to improve the accessibility of their website and was keen to discuss our research and gain in addition to giving information. On the other hand, no local authorities contacted in the North West of England joined the project. Most simply did not respond to email or telephone requests and normally after 3 attempts to make contact it was determined not to pursue the matter any further. We did have personal contacts through a third party with one major local authority. Initially it appeared the authority would join the project, but again they declined to participate. However, in this case an explanation was provided. We were informed the organisation recognised their website was not accessible and were updating it to meet accessibility guidelines. Clearly any research during a period of alteration would be problematic and disruptive for the organisation. Although this represents an official line, unofficially we were advised that the organisation did not wish to participate in research which it felt may be critical of its internet resources. Again this is a problem area well known to researchers,, firstly in regard to how much time can be spent (Hill 1993); and how to gain access to research sites which may be concerned over any critical findings (Buchanan et al 1986; Jorgensen1989). However, despite the absence of any local authority from the project, as indicated, several public sector organisations including some employment centres did agree to provide interviews. By comparison, private sector organisations were generally more inclined to join the research for differing reasons.
In total 5 private sector organisations provided interviews. The initial contact for both public and private sector organisations was through the accessibility steering group of the trade organisation in Manchester. Initial contact was through personal contacts developed by the project manager Dr David Kreps. Dr Kreps is a published author in the field of accessibility and hence his personal contacts were extremely beneficial to the project as he was regarded as an ‘insider’ by many organisations which again is recognised as a beneficial factor when seeking access (Buchanan et al 1986; Jorgensen 1989; Miller and Glassner 1997). Initial contact with private sector organisations commenced with a presentation of the research aims at an accessibility event held by the Manchester Digital trade association. This approach provided two direct contacts who expressed a desire to participate in the research. However, the majority of private sector participants emerged through a ‘snow balling’ method (Mason 1996: 103). We found after interviews researchers were provided with additional names and contact details of other organisations who would probably be interested in the project. This method was the most successful for gaining participatory organisations. One other private sector organisation ‘Fluid creativity’ joined the research but through a different channel to those discussed above. One principal reason for producing a project website as discussed in section 1.5was to enable user testers to interact with the site and provide an analysis to the project of external employment related websites. Clearly an organisation with proven competencies and capabilities in the area of accessible design was required to build the site. The contract for the work was offered by tender to three web development organisations who specialised in accessible web design. The company eventually awarded the contract was ‘Fluid creativity’, which offered itself as an accessibility specialist. These claims were supported by recently awarded industry prizes won in open competition with industry rivals for the accessibility of their web designs. An analysis of the difficulties encountered making the project website are discussed in section xxx. Perhaps unsurprisingly the organisation agreed to participate in an interview before they commenced the work. Here reassurances were provided regarding the relatively straight forward nature of producing an accessible website. However, as the delivered site proved to be unusable in certain areas for screen reader users, and several months passed before a fully accessible website was produced, the organisation was asked for a second interview in November 2007. This second interview became a pivotal aspect of the project and is contained in section xxx. After all, it would be hypocritical in the extreme if a research project intended to reveal barriers to inclusion through inaccessible web content design, did not confront the unexpected difficulties the project itself had in making an accessible website. It should be noted here that no criticism of ‘Fluid creativity’ is implied or intended. The organisation worked in close collaboration with the project team, with both parties working to resolve some unexpected technical difficulties.