Person in business attire holding a smartphone while sitting at a desk with an open laptop, with digital notification icons floating above the phone including: 37 emails, 95 hearts, 65 chat messages, 99 shopping cart items, 70 user connections, $59, and 100 likes.

Project 4: Accessibility Needs for User-Generated Digital Content

This ongoing research lab project examines how Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing (DHH) and Blind and Low-Vision (BLV) users experience user-generated content (UGC) online through literature reviews, a survey, and interviews. This project is ongoing and on track for publication, with ongoing work planned to extend its findings.

Conducted via DePaul University Accessibility Research Lab

Project Timeline:

Project Type: Inclusive Research & UX Audit

Primary Tools: Qualtrics, R, Prolific, Canva, Atlas.ti, Turboscribe, and Overleaf

My Role: Research Lab Assistant

Duration: Over 1 year

Project Overview

Background: What is This Research Lab Project?

Infographic titled "UGC Accessibility for DHH and BLV Users" with subtitle text: "Research shows UGC still falls short—improvements are most needed." Platforms: Icon of a tablet and phone; text reads, "Social media & creation tools often lack accessibility." Devices: Icon of a laptop; text reads, "Phones, tablets, and computers don’t always support inclusive features." Media Types: Icon of a photo and caption bubble; text reads, "Videos, images, and text often miss captions, alt text, or transcripts." Bottom text: "We explored how DHH and BLV users access, use, and create online content."

As user-generated content (UGC) becomes central to everyday communication, accessibility for Deaf or Hard-of-Hearing (DHH) and Blind or Low-Vision (BLV) users remains a critical concern. Our research investigated how DHH and BLV individuals experience accessibility across online platforms, devices, and media types they rely on to view, consume, and create content.

We identified areas where UGC still falls short for DHH and BLV users and where improvements are most needed.

Problem:

To better understand the barriers sensory-disabled users face with online content, this study examined where accessibility efforts fall short.

Goals/Study Objective:

These gaps informed the direction of our study.

My Contribution:

Infographic with a light bulb icon labeled "Planning." Three teal boxes list contributions: #1. "Conducted a literature review to identify critical accessibility gaps across UGC." #2. "Ensured our study protocols met ethical standards for working with participants." #3. "Led participant recruitment using Prolific, Reddit, and personal connections."

Infographic with an orange hand-and-connection icon labeled "Testing." Two orange boxes list contributions: #1. "Developed and distributed a mixed-methods survey to gather key user insights." #2. "Plans to conduct semi-structured interviews to gain deeper insights."

Infographic with a red document icon labeled "Reporting." A red box below contains the text: "Led the findings analysis and translated results into actionable recommendations."

With planning and research in place, structured methods were used to explore accessibility gaps more deeply.

Understanding the Problem

Tip: Click the images in the slider to enlarge them.

Methods- Literature Review:

A review of over 100 research articles on how DHH and BLV users interact with UGC, motivations for participation, and experiences and challenges with digital content.

Doing this ensured the study was grounded in real evidence, highlighted where barriers remain, and guided our survey design.

Findings- Literature Review:

Our team identified 5 key themes:

Theme 1: Misaligned tools and standards – Social platforms lack consistent alt-text, captions, and a

Theme 2: Invisible labor and fatigue – Sensory-disabled users must retrofit content, causing frustra

Theme 5: Online ableism and social exclusion – Biased algorithms and ableist content restrict safe p

Theme 1: Misaligned tools and standards – Social platforms lack consistent alt-text, captions, and a

1/5

Methods- Survey:

To better understand the experiences and challenges that DHH and BLV users face with UGC, a mixed-methods survey was launched with 174 U.S.-based participants who self-identified as DHH or BLV. The survey gathered primarily quantitative and some qualitative feedback on how often they view, consume, and create digital content, as well as the accessibility barriers they encounter. This approach ensured that our findings reflected real experiences rather than assumptions.

Due to an influx of BLV participants, there was a need to reduce potential bias in our analysis, so a random selection of 40 DHH and 40 BLV participants within the same age ranges was made for comparison. Balancing the sample enabled a fair comparison between the two groups and pinpointed where accessibility gaps and new solutions mattered most for this project.

Findings- Survey:

Still in progress! This section will be updated with insights once synthesis is complete.

Black and white graphic of a hammer leaning against the words “COMING SOON” in bold capital letters inside a rectangular outline.

Methods- Interview:

To deepen our understanding of DHH and BLV users’ digital experiences, a semi-structured interview will be conducted with 10 participants from each user group, to build on the survey findings and explore their experiences in greater depth.

Once the interviews are completed, AI tools will be used to transcribe the sessions, followed by a team thematic analysis using open coding to identify patterns, highlight key themes, and surface actionable insights for more inclusive digital practices. This process will help uncover the reasons why access barriers exist and reveal the solutions that participants envision for making UGC more inclusive.

Findings- Interview:

Still in progress! Our interviews will run through mid-September 2025. Once completed and synthesized, this section will be updated with those insights

Impact & Next Steps

Tip: Click the images in the slider to enlarge them.

Actionable Recommendations:

Still in progress! Recommendations will be developed after interviews are completed and analyzed during the fall.

Ongoing Opportunities:

Reflections will be added once interviews are finished and insights have been reviewed.

Circular infographic divided into two halves labeled Areas of Improvement (left, green) and Future Directions (right, red). Areas of Improvement: Time management: Synthesizing survey data took longer than anticipated due to underestimated complexity. Recruitment challenges: Fraudulent responses and limited diversity, with overrepresentation of white female participants. Scheduling constraints: Interview phase delayed by extended IRB approval timelines, highlighting the need to plan for procedural delays. Future Directions: Present survey findings: Preparing clear, impactful presentation of key results. Conduct interview phase: Launching in September post-IRB approval, followed by synthesis of qualitative insights. Conference preparation: Drafting research paper and presentation for CHI or ASSETS, emphasizing diverse participant perspectives.

Back

My Projects