*Note: This is a long read, 62 pages at 14Pt Font.
Screen Reader User Survey #7 Results
Read it online at:
https://webaim.org/projects/screenreadersurvey7/
article
WebAIM Projects
> Screen Reader User Survey #7 Results
navigation region
Article Contents
list of 19 items
- Introduction
- Demographics
list of 6 items nesting level 1
- Region
- Disability Reported
- Disability Types
- Screen Reader Proficiency
- Internet Proficiency
- Screen reader usage
list end nesting level 1
- Primary Screen Reader
- Screen Readers Commonly Used
- Free/Low-cost Screen Readers
- Screen Reader Updates
- Browsers
- Screen Reader / Browser Combinations
- Operating System
- Braille Output
- Mobile Screen Readers
list of 5 items nesting level 1
- Mobile Screen Reader Usage
- Mobile Platforms
- Mobile Screen Readers Used
- Mobile vs. Desktop/Laptop Usage
- Mobile Keyboard Usage
list end nesting level 1
- Web Accessibility Progress
- Impacts on Accessibility
- Social Media Accessibility
- Landmarks/Regions
- Finding Information
- Heading Structures
- “Skip” Links
- Problematic Items
list end
navigation region end
Introduction
In October 2017, WebAIM surveyed preferences of screen reader users. We received 1792 valid responses. This was a follow-up to 6 previous surveys that
were conducted between January 2009 and July 2015 (see
Related Resources).
A few disclaimers and notices:
list of 4 items
- Totals may not equal 100% due to rounding.
- Total responses (n) for each question may not equal 1792 due to respondents not answering that particular question.
- The sample was not controlled and may not represent all screen reader users.
- We hope to conduct additional surveys of this nature again in the future. If you have recommendations or questions you would like us to ask, please
contact us.
list end
Demographics
Region
North AmericaEurope/UKAsiaAustralia and OceaniaAfrica/Middle EastSouth AmericaCentral America andCaribbean23%60%
table with 3 columns and 8 rows
Region
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
North America
991
60.0%
Europe/UK
380
23.0%
Asia
141
8.5%
Australia and Oceania
61
3.7%
Africa/Middle East
39
2.4%
South America
35
2.1%
Central America and Caribbean
5
0.3%
table end
Caribbean
table with 3 columns and 8 rows
Respondent Region
Region
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
North America
991
60.0%
Europe/UK
380
23.0%
Asia
141
8.5%
Australia and Oceania
61
3.7%
Africa/Middle East
39
2.4%
South America
35
2.1%
Central America and Caribbean
5
0.3%
table end
This survey had more respondents outside North America than previous surveys, thus providing better representation of the global screen reader user audience.
Disability Reported
YesNo10.8%89.2%
table with 3 columns and 3 rows
Response
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
Yes
1,585
89.2%
No
192
10.9%
table end
No
table with 3 columns and 3 rows
Do you use a screen reader due to a disability?
Response
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
Yes
1,585
89.2%
No
192
10.9%
table end
In general, we’ve found survey responses to be very similar between respondents with and without disabilities. Any notable differences are detailed below
to help us determine differences in practices or perceptions between the disability and the developer communities.
Disability Types
Disability Types (% of respondents)BlindnessLow Vision/Visually-ImpairedCognitiveDeafness/Hard-of-HearingMotorOther0%25%50%75%100%
table with 2 columns and 7 rows
Response
% of Respondents
Blindness
75.8
Low Vision/Visually-Impaired
20.4
Cognitive
2.2
Deafness/Hard-of-Hearing
5
Motor
1.8
Other
2.3
table end
Disability Types (% of respondents)
table with 3 columns and 7 rows
Which of the following disabilities do you have?
Response
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
Blindness
1,358
75.8%
Low Vision/Visually-Impaired
366
20.4%
Cognitive
39
2.2%
Deafness/Hard-of-Hearing
90
5.0%
Motor
33
1.8%
Other
41
2.3%
table end
239 respondents (13.3%) reported multiple disabilities. 70 respondents (3.9%) reported being both deaf and blind.
The number of respondents with low vision was notably lower than in 2015. This corresponds with decreased usage of ZoomText among respondents.
Screen Reader Proficiency
AdvancedIntermediateBeginner6%34.6%59.5%
table with 3 columns and 4 rows
Response
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
Advanced
1,039
59.5%
Intermediate
604
34.6%
Beginner
104
6.0%
table end
Beginner
table with 3 columns and 4 rows
Please rate your screen reader proficiency
Response
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
Advanced
1,039
59.5%
Intermediate
604
34.6%
Beginner
104
6.0%
table end
Those who use screen readers due to a disability report themselves as more proficient with screen readers—64.2% of those with disabilities considered their
proficiency to be “Advanced” compared to only 19.8% of those without disabilities.
Internet Proficiency
AdvancedIntermediateBeginner25.3%72.9%
table with 3 columns and 4 rows
Response
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
Advanced
1,278
72.9%
Intermediate
444
25.3%
Beginner
30
1.7%
table end
Beginner
table with 3 columns and 4 rows
Please rate your proficiency using the Internet
Response
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
Advanced
1,278
72.9%
Intermediate
444
25.3%
Beginner
30
1.7%
table end
Reported proficiency on this survey was notably higher than all previous surveys, perhaps suggesting that screen reader users are becoming more accustomed
to using the internet. Those without disabilities rate themselves as more proficient than those with disabilities.
Screen Reader Usage
Exclusively audioPrimarily audio, but alsovisualPrimarily visual, but alsoaudioExclusively visual11.1%75.6%
table with 3 columns and 5 rows
Response
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
Exclusively audio
1,311
75.6%
Primarily audio, but also visual
193
11.1%
Primarily visual, but also audio
145
8.4%
Exclusively visual
85
4.9%
table end
Exclusively visual
table with 3 columns and 5 rows
Which of the following most accurately describes your screen reader usage?
Response
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
I exclusively rely on screen reader audio
1,311
75.6%
I primarily rely on screen reader audio, but also use visual content
193
11.1%
I primarily rely on visual content, but also use screen reader audio
145
8.4%
I exclusively rely on visual content
85
4.9%
table end
Nearly 25% of respondents rely at least partially on the visual components when using a screen reader. 83.4% of those with disabilities rely exclusively
on audio, compared to only 5.3% of those without disabilities (primarily testers). This is not entirely unexpected, but does indicate significant differences
in usage between those with disabilities and those without disabilities.
Only 1.3% of those with disabilities rely exclusively on the visual output—many of these reported having cognitive or learning disabilities. Users of ZoomText,
Narrator, and ChromeVox were much more likely to use the visual output than users of other screen readers.
Primary Screen Reader
JAWSNVDAVoiceOverZoomTextSystem Access orSA To GoWindow-EyesChromeVoxNarratorOther46.6%11.7%31.9%
table with 3 columns and 10 rows
Screen Reader
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
JAWS
811
46.6%
NVDA
555
31.9%
VoiceOver
204
11.7%
ZoomText
42
2.4%
System Access or SA To Go
30
1.7%
Window-Eyes
27
1.5%
ChromeVox
7
0.4%
Narrator
6
0.3%
Other
60
3.4%
table end
Other
table with 3 columns and 10 rows
Which of the following is your primary desktop/laptop screen reader?
Screen Reader
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
JAWS
811
46.6%
NVDA
555
31.9%
VoiceOver
204
11.7%
ZoomText
42
2.4%
System Access or SA To Go
30
1.7%
Window-Eyes
27
1.5%
ChromeVox
7
0.4%
Narrator
6
0.3%
Other
60
3.4%
table end
The following chart shows historical trends for primary screen reader usage.
Line chart of primary screen reader usage over time. In 2015, ZoomText and WindowEyes rise dramatically and JAWS falls. In 2017, ZoomText and WindowEyes
drop dramatically and JAWS, NVDA, and VoiceOver rise.
What happened in 2015? Essentially, the survey was distributed to a much broader audience, with many ZoomText and Window-Eyes users recruited to respond.
Window-Eyes was also offered freely with Microsoft Office before the 2015 survey, but has since been discontinued. A much broader analysis from 2015 is
available on the
WebAIM blog.
This doesn’t necessarily mean that the 2015 numbers were inaccurate. They certainly are accurate of respondents for that survey, which included more low=vision
users than any other survey. 39% of respondents in July 2015 reported low vision, compared to only 20.4% on this survey. This difference in respondent
demographics accounts for much or most of the decrease of respondents using ZoomText in 2017.
In short, there are three primary players—JAWS, NVDA, and VoiceOver. But we should not discount the continued impact of other screen readers, primarily
ZoomText among the broader low vision community.
For survey simplicity, other specific screen readers were not offered as response options. The survey comments indicate that SuperNova was very common
among “Other” screen readers.
Respondents with disabilities are more likely to use JAWS and less likely to use VoiceOver as their primary screen reader than respondents without disabilities.
10.4% of respondents with disabilities use VoiceOver compared to 22.6% of respondents without disabilities.
NVDA users reported higher levels of screen reader proficiency than users of other screen readers.
Screen Readers Commonly Used
Screen Readers Commonly Used (% of respondents)JAWSNVDAVoiceOverZoomTextSA or SA To GoWindow-EyesNarratorChromeVoxOther0%25%50%75%100%
table with 2 columns and 10 rows
Response
% of Respondents
JAWS
66
NVDA
64.9
VoiceOver
39.6
ZoomText
6
SA or SA To Go
4
Window-Eyes
4.7
Narrator
21.4
ChromeVox
5.1
Other
6.4
table end
Screen Readers Commonly Used (% of respondents)
table with 2 columns and 10 rows
Which of the following desktop/laptop screen readers do you commonly use?
Screen Reader
% of Respondents
JAWS
66.0%
NVDA
64.9%
VoiceOver
39.6%
ZoomText
6.0%
SA or SA To Go
4.0%
Window-Eyes
4.7%
Narrator
21.4%
ChromeVox
5.1%
Other
6.4%
table end
Chart of screen reader usage showing recent increases in usage of JAWS, NVDA, and VoiceOver, and significant decreases in Window-Eyes and ZoomText.
See the
commentary above
regarding the July 2015 values.
Usage of JAWS, NVDA, and VoiceOver are all up since 2015, with Window-Eyes and ZoomText significantly lower. Of note is that Narrator, which has been significantly
improved in Windows 10, was used as a primary screen reader by only 0.3% of respondents, but was commonly used by 21.4% of respondents.
68% of respondents use more than one desktop/laptop screen reader. This was up from 53% in July 2015. 36% use three or more, and 12% use four or more different
screen readers. VoiceOver users most commonly use additional screen readers, which is notable since the other screen readers run almost exclusively on
Windows.
Free/Low-cost Screen Readers
YesNoI Don’t Know11.7%10.5%77.8%
table with 3 columns and 4 rows
Response
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
Yes
1,367
77.8%
No
184
10.5%
I Don’t Know
206
11.7%
table end
I Don’t Know
table with 3 columns and 4 rows
Do you see free or low-cost screen readers (such as NVDA or VoiceOver) as currently being viable alternatives to commercial screen readers?
Response
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
Yes
1,367
77.8%
No
184
10.5%
I Don’t Know
206
11.7%
table end
The positive perception of free or low-cost screen readers continues to increase. Positive responses to this question were 48% in October 2009, 60% in
December 2010, 67% in May 2012, 74% in January 2014, and 78% now.
Only 66% of JAWS users answered “Yes” compared to an overwhelming 92% of VoiceOver users and 94% of NVDA users. Those that actually use free or low-cost
screen readers have a much better perception of them than those who do not use them. Respondents with “Advanced” screen reader proficiency were also more
favorable of free/low-cost screen readers.
Screen Reader Updates
YesNo11.5%88.5%
table with 3 columns and 3 rows
Response
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
Yes
1,562
88.5%
No
203
11.5%
table end
No
table with 3 columns and 3 rows
Has your primary screen reader been updated in the last year?
Response
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
Yes
1,562
88.5%
No
203
11.5%
table end
The vast majority (88.5%) of respondents indicated that their screen reader has been updated in the last year. This was 82.7% in 2014. 95.5% of NVDA users,
93.4% of VoiceOver users, and 85.9% of JAWS users updated in the last year.
Browsers
FirefoxIE11ChromeSafariIE6, 7, or 8IE 9 or 10Microsoft EdgeOther41%15.5%23.3%
table with 3 columns and 9 rows
Browser
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
Firefox
719
41.0%
IE11
408
23.3%
Chrome
271
15.5%
Safari
184
10.5%
IE6, 7, or 8
71
4.1%
IE 9 or 10
70
4.0%
Microsoft Edge
8
0.5%
Other
22
1.3%
table end
Other
table with 3 columns and 9 rows
When using your primary screen reader, which browser do you use most often?
Browser
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
Firefox
719
41.0%
Internet Explorer 11
408
23.3%
Chrome
271
15.5%
Safari
184
10.5%
Internet Explorer 6, 7, or 8
71
4.1%
Internet Explorer 9 or 10
70
4.0%
Microsoft Edge
8
0.5%
Other
22
1.3%
table end
Line chart of primary browser usage showing increases in Firefox and Chrome, decreases in Internet Explorer, and Safari usage generally stable since 2009.
For the first time, IE is no longer the most common browser among respondents. Internet Explorer (all versions) usage decreased to 31.4% from 53.5% in
July 2015, 58.7% in January 2014, and 67.5% in May 2012. Firefox was used by 41% (up from 24.2% in 2014) of respondents. 31.4% represents a significantly
higher IE usage than among the overall population (most statistics place it well below 10%). Usage of IE 6 through 10 was almost non-existent (1.6%) among
those without disabilities, but remains at 8.8% among those with disabilities.
Usage of Chrome more than doubled since July 2015, but was still well below usage by the overall population. Microsoft Edge usage was very low at .5%—notably
below the overall population.
Screen Reader / Browser Combinations
table with 3 columns and 10 rows
Most common screen reader and browser combinations
Screen Reader & Browser
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
JAWS with Internet Explorer
424
24.7%
NVDA with Firefox
405
23.6%
JAWS with Firefox
260
15.1%
VoiceOver with Safari
172
10.0%
JAWS with Chrome
112
6.5%
NVDA with Chrome
102
5.9%
NVDA with IE
40
2.3%
VoiceOver with Chrome
24
1.4%
Other combinations
180
10.5%
table end
There are many combinations in use, with JAWS with IE the most common, followed closely by NVDA with Firefox.
Operating System
WindowsiOSAppleAndroidLinuxOther14.2%72.8%
table with 3 columns and 7 rows
Operating System
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
Windows
1,304
72.8%
iOS
254
14.2%
Apple
141
7.9%
Android
55
3.1%
Linux
25
1.4%
Other
13
.7%
table end
Other
table with 3 columns and 7 rows
Operating System
Operating System
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
Windows
1,304
72.8%
iOS
254
14.2%
Apple
141
7.9%
Android
55
3.1%
Linux
25
1.4%
Other
13
.7%
table end
Operating system data above was detected from the system used to complete the survey. Respondents using iOS and Android nearly tripled since 2015. Respondents
without disabilities were almost 4 times more likely to use Apple than respondents with disabilities, whereas users with disabilities were more likely
to respond using iOS devices.
Braille Output
YesNo33.3%66.7%
table with 3 columns and 3 rows
Response
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
Yes
516
33.3%
No
1,034
66.7%
table end
No
table with 3 columns and 3 rows
Do you use braille output with your screen reader?
Response
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
Yes
516
33.3%
No
1,034
66.7%
table end
Because it would not generally be expected that users without disabilities would use Braille, they have been omitted from these data. Braille usage at
33.3% was up slightly from 27.7% in May 2012. 48.7% of VoiceOver users used Braille compared to a much lower 35.1% of JAWS users and 29.9% of NVDA users.
Mobile Screen Readers
Mobile Screen Reader Usage
YesNo12%88%
table with 3 columns and 3 rows
Response
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
Yes
1,557
88.0%
No
213
12.0%
table end
No
table with 3 columns and 3 rows
Do you use a screen reader on a mobile phone, mobile handheld device, or tablet?
Response
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
Yes
1,557
88.0%
No
213
12.0%
table end
Chart of mobile screen reader adoption over time showing continual increases, with a small decrease in 2015.
The percentage of respondents using a mobile screen reader was notably up from 69.2% in July 2015, when the survey had broader distribution to a more diverse
and less technically proficient user base. 90.9% of respondents with disabilities indicate using a mobile screen reader, compared to only 65.3% of respondents
without disabilities. 94.3% of users with advanced screen reader proficiency indicate using a mobile screen reader compared to just 50.5% of those with
beginner proficiency.
Mobile Platforms
Apple iPhone, iPad, oriPod touchAndroidOther22%75.6%
table with 3 columns and 4 rows
Response
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
Apple iPhone, iPad, or iPod touch
1,146
75.6%
Android
334
22.0%
Other
35
2.3%
table end
Other
table with 3 columns and 4 rows
Which of the following is your primary mobile/tablet platform?
Response
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
Apple iPhone, iPad, or iPod touch
1,146
75.6%
Android
334
22.0%
Other
35
2.3%
table end
iOS devices continue to dominate the mobile screen reader market. Android usage increased slightly, though at a slower pace than previous years. Usage
of other platforms (Windows Phone, Chrome OS, Nokia, etc.) combined represent only 2.3% of usage.
Chart of mobile platform usage.
iOS device usage among screen reader users was notably higher than for the standard population, whereas Android usage was much, much lower. Those with
more advanced screen reader and internet proficiency were much more likely to use iOS over Android.
Mobile Screen Readers Used
Mobile Screen Readers Commonly Used (% of respondents)VoiceOverTalkBackVoice AssistantMobile AccessibilityNuance TalksMobileSpeakOther0%25%50%75%100%
table with 2 columns and 8 rows
Response
% of Respondents
VoiceOver
69
TalkBack
29.5
Voice Assistant
5.2
Mobile Accessibility
1.9
Nuance Talks
1.8
MobileSpeak
1.5
Other
3.2
table end
Mobile Screen Readers Commonly Used (% of respondents)
table with 2 columns and 8 rows
Which of the following mobile screen readers do you commonly use? (Choose all that apply)
Mobile Screen Reader
% of Respondents
VoiceOver
69.0%
TalkBack for Android
29.5%
Voice Assistant
5.2%
Mobile Accessibility for Android
1.9%
Nuance Talks
1.8%
MobileSpeak
1.5%
Other
3.2%
table end
Since July 2015, VoiceOver usage increased to 69% from 56.7%. TalkBack increased to 29.5% from 17.8% over the same 2.5 year period. All other mobile screen
readers saw decreased usage over that period. 20.9% of respondents commonly use multiple mobile screen readers.
Mobile vs. Desktop/Laptop Usage
Which do you use most often with a screen reader?Desktop/LaptopAbout the sameMobile/Tablet34.6%11.4%54%
table with 3 columns and 4 rows
Response
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
Desktop/Laptop
528
34.6%
About the same
825
54.0%
Mobile/Tablet
174
11.4%
table end
Mobile/Tablet
table with 3 columns and 4 rows
Do you use a screen reader most often on a desktop/laptop computer or a mobile/tablet device?
Response
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
Desktop/Laptop
528
34.6%
I use mobile/tablet and desktop/laptop screen readers about the same
825
54.0%
Mobile/Tablet device
174
11.4%
table end
54% of respondents use both devices about the same amount. Users are more likely to predominantly use desktop/laptop screen readers than they are mobile/tablet
screen readers. Respondents with disabilities are more likely to use a mobile screen reader than respondents without disabilities.
Mobile App vs Web Site Usage
Mobile AppWeb site46%54%
table with 3 columns and 3 rows
Response
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
Mobile App
779
46%
Web site
916
54%
table end
Web site
table with 3 columns and 3 rows
When performing common online tasks such as banking or shopping are you most likely to use a mobile app or the web site?
Response
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
Mobile App
779
46%
Web site
916
54%
table end
Respondents with disabilities are more likely to use the mobile app than respondents that do not have disabilities. Those with advanced screen reader proficiency
were much more likely to use the mobile app than those with beginner proficiency.
Mobile Keyboard Usage
AlwaysOftenSometimesSeldomNever12%26.1%38.2%21.2%
table with 3 columns and 6 rows
Response
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
Always
39
3.9%
Often
181
11.8%
Sometimes
394
25.7%
Seldom
320
20.9%
Never
577
37.7%
table end
Never
table with 3 columns and 6 rows
When using a mobile screen reader how often do you use an external keyboard?
Response
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
Always
39
3.9%
Often
181
11.8%
Sometimes
394
25.7%
Seldom
320
20.9%
Never
577
37.7%
table end
Mobile devices are often considered to be touch-only interfaces, yet many screen reader users use a keyboard when using their mobile devices.
Web Accessibility Progress
More AccessibleNo ChangeLess Accessible40.8%18.8%40.4%
table with 3 columns and 4 rows
Response
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
More Accessible
711
40.8
No Change
703
40.4%
Less Accessible
327
18.8%
table end
Less Accessible
table with 3 columns and 4 rows
Which of the following best describes your feelings regarding the accessibility of web content over the previous year?
Response
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
Web content has become more accessible
711
40.8%
Web content accessibility has not changed
703
40.4%
Web content has become less accessible
327
18.8%
table end
Respondents have a slightly more positive perception of the state of web accessibility now than they did in 2015. Respondents without disabilities tend
to be more positive about recent progress (51.7% thought it has become more accessible) than those with disabilities (39.6% thought it has become more
accessible).
Impacts on Accessibility
Which would have a bigger impact on accessibility?Better (more accessible)web sitesBetter assistivetechnology14.7%85.3%
table with 3 columns and 3 rows
Response
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
Better (more accessible) web sites
1,490
85.3
Better assistive technology
257
14.7%
table end
technology
table with 3 columns and 3 rows
Which of the following do you think would have a bigger impact on improvements to web accessibility?
Response
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
Better (more accessible) web sites
1490
85.3%
Better assistive technology
257
14.7%
table end
Over time, more respondents have answered “better web sites” to this question—68.6% of respondents in October 2009, 75.8% in December 2010, 81.3% in January
2014, and now 85.3% on this survey. This change perhaps reflects improvements to assistive technology. It certainly indicates that users expect site authors
to address accessibility issues.
Social Media Accessibility
Very AccessibleSomewhat AccessibleSomewhat InaccessibleVery InaccessibleI Don’t Know14.9%11.3%14.5%54.3%
table with 3 columns and 6 rows
Response
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
Very Accessible
253
14.9%
Somewhat Accessible
921
54.3%
Somewhat Inaccessible
246
14.5%
Very Inaccessible
83
4.9%
I Don’t Know
192
11.3%
table end
I Don’t Know
table with 3 columns and 6 rows
In general, how accessible are social media web sites to you?
Response
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
Very Accessible
253
14.9%
Somewhat Accessible
921
54.3%
Somewhat Inaccessible
246
14.5%
Very Inaccessible
83
4.9%
I Don’t Know
192
11.3%
table end
Compared to responses from previous surveys, respondents are increasingly positive about the accessibility of social media sites – 69.2% find them very
or somewhat accessible compared to 55.2% in 2012 and 60.3% in 2015. 73.1% of respondents with advanced screen reader proficiency rate social media sites
as very or somewhat accessible, compared to only 62.8% of respondents with beginner proficiency.
Landmarks/Regions
Whenever they’reavailableOftenSometimesSeldomNever18%12.5%19.4%21.3%28.8%
table with 3 columns and 6 rows
Response
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
Whenever they’re available
307
18.0%
Often
213
12.5%
Sometimes
491
28.8%
Seldom
364
21.3%
Never
332
19.4%
table end
Never
table with 3 columns and 6 rows
How often do you navigate by landmarks/regions in your screen reader?
Response
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
Whenever they’re available
307
18.0%
Often
213
12.5%
Sometimes
491
28.8%
Seldom
364
21.3%
Never
332
19.4%
table end
The frequent use of landmarks and regions has continually decreased from 43.8% in January 2014, to 38.6% in July 2015, to 30.5% on this survey. It’s difficult
to know the reasons for this. It could be due to infrequent or improper usage of landmarks/regions in pages. Or perhaps because other mechanisms are continually
better. 45.4% of JAWS users reported always or often using landmarks in July 2015 compared to only 28.5% now just 2.5 years later.
Finding Information
Pie chart of methods for finding information on a lengthy web pageNavigate HeadingsUse “Find”Navigate LinksNavigate Landmarks/RegionsRead the page14.4%67.5%
table with 3 columns and 6 rows
Response
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
Navigate Headings
1,180
67.5%
Use “Find”
252
14.4%
Navigate Links
118
6.8%
Navigate Landmarks/Regions
69
3.9%
Read the page
128
7.3%
table end
Read the page
table with 3 columns and 6 rows
When trying to find information on a lengthy web page, which of the following are you most likely to do first?
Response
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
Navigate through the headings on the page
1180
67.5%
Use the “Find” feature
252
14.4%
Navigate through the links of the page
118
6.8%
Navigate through the landmarks/regions of the page
69
3.9%
Read through the page
128
7.3%
table end
While reliance on headings as the predominant mechanism for finding page information had notably increased between 2008 and 2014, responses to this question
are largely unchanged since
2014.
While 30.5% of respondents indicate that they always or often use landmarks when they are present, only 3.9% use this method for finding information on
a lengthy web page. Those with advanced screen reader proficiency are much more likely to use headings (73% use headings) than those with beginner proficiency
(42% use headings) who are more likely to read through the page.
Heading Structures
Heading structure preferencesSite name in <h1>Document title in <h1>Two <h1>s33.3%60%
table with 3 columns and 4 rows
Response
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
Site name in <h1>
95
6.6%
Document title in <h1>
858
60.0%
Two <h1>s
476
33.3%
table end
Two <h1>s
table with 3 columns and 4 rows
Which of the following page heading structures is easiest for you?
Response
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
One first level heading that contains the site name
95
6.6%
One first level heading that contains the document title
858
60.0%
Two first level headings, one for the site name and one for the document title
476
33.3%
table end
Preference for a single <h1> that presents the document title has significantly increased from 37.1% in 2010 to 60% in 2017. A single <h1> for the site
name was by far the least desired.
“Skip” Links
Skip link usageWhenever they’reavailableOftenSometimesSeldomNever15.8%16.4%18.4%21.6%27.8%
table with 3 columns and 6 rows
Response
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
Whenever they’re available
273
15.8%
Often
283
16.4%
Sometimes
480
27.8%
Seldom
374
21.6%
Never
319
18.4%
table end
Never
table with 3 columns and 6 rows
When a “skip to main content” or “skip navigation” link is available on a page, how often do you use it?
Response
# of Respondents
% of Respondents
Whenever they’re available
273
15.8%
Often
283
16.4%
Sometimes
480
27.8%
Seldom
374
21.6%
Never
319
18.4%
table end
When compared to July 2015, the frequent usage of “skip” links has decreased from 37.8% to 30.2%. 54.9% of respondents without disabilities always or often
use “skip” links compared to only 29.6% of respondents with disabilities. This represents a very significant disparity in usage.
It is important to note that while usage has decreased among screen reader users, “skip” links still provide notable benefit for other keyboard users.
Problematic Items
The survey asked respondents to select their most, second most, and third most problematic items from a list. In giving each selected item a weighting,
the following chart shows the overall rating of difficulty and frustration for each item.
Most Problematic ItemsCAPTCHAUnexpected screen changesAmbiguous links/buttonsFlash contentLack of keyboard accessibilityComplex/difficult formsMissing/improper
alt textMissing/improper headingsToo many linksComplex data tablesInaccessible/missing searchMissing “skip” link
table with 2 columns and 13 rows
Response
Ranking
CAPTCHA
2,633
Unexpected screen changes
1,516
Ambiguous links/buttons
1,401
Flash content
1,287
Lack of keyboard accessibility
1,076
Complex/difficult forms
623
Missing/improper alt text
585
Missing/improper headings
448
Too many links
358
Complex data tables
228
Inaccessible/missing search
156
Missing “skip” link
105
table end
Most Problematic Items
In order, the most problematic items are:
list of 12 items
- CAPTCHA – images presenting text used to verify that you are a human user
- Screens or parts of screens that change unexpectedly
- Links or buttons that do not make sense
- The presence of inaccessible Flash content
- Lack of keyboard accessibility
- Complex or difficult forms
- Images with missing or improper descriptions (alt text)
- Missing or improper headings
- Too many links or navigation items
- Complex data tables
- Inaccessible or missing search functionality
- Lack of “skip to main content” or “skip navigation” links
list end
CAPTCHA remains the most (by a notable margin) problematic item indicated by respondents. The order and indicated difficulty for the items in this list are largely unchanged over the last 8 years, with one notable exception—”Screens or parts of screens that change unexpectedly”. This item has moved from 7th most problematic in 2009 to 5th most problematic in 2012 to 2nd most problematic in 2017. This is likely a result of more complex and dynamic web applications.
Respondents with disabilities were nearly twice as likely to rank CAPTCHA and unexpected screen changes as problematic items than respondents without disabilities, who generally indicated that keyboard and forms accessibility were much more problematic than their peers with disabilities. 10.9% of respondents with disabilities rated keyboard accessibility as their single most problematic item, compared to 39.6% of respondents without disabilities. This suggests some notable disparities in perception of difficulties between these two groups.
article end
GTT Program blog and resources 