Assessment & Research

Evaluation of cognitively accessible software to increase independent access to cellphone technology for people with intellectual disability.

Stock et al. (2008) · Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR 2008
★ The Verdict

A picture-and-audio cellphone menu cuts help and errors in half for adults with ID.

✓ Read this if BCBAs helping teens or adults with ID use phones or tablets.
✗ Skip if Clinicians who only work with verbal clients already fluent in tech.

01Research in Context

01

What this study did

Lancioni et al. (2008) built a simple picture-and-audio cellphone menu.

They asked adults with intellectual disability to call, text, and hang up.

Each person tried the new phone and then a regular phone.

Staff counted how many times they needed help and how many mistakes happened.

02

What they found

People needed half as much help with the special phone.

They also made half as many errors.

The picture menu and spoken cues let them work the phone alone.

03

How this fits with other research

Schertz et al. (2018) later asked high-schoolers with autism how they use tech.

Those teens said phones and tablets lower anxiety and boost freedom.

Both studies show tech can grow independence, just in different age groups.

Cariveau et al. (2021) gives a how-to for tweaking everyday software.

Their PowerPoint trick and E’s phone tweak share the same idea: make the tool fit the user, not the other way around.

04

Why it matters

You can copy the same design rules today: big pictures, short voice labels, and one action per screen.

Try them on any tablet or phone your client already owns.

Start with a single task like calling Mom.

Track prompts and errors for ten trials.

If help drops, roll the layout out to other apps like Uber or weather.

Free CEUs

Want CEUs on This Topic?

The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.

Join Free →
→ Action — try this Monday

Make a three-icon home screen with voice labels and test one call task.

02At a glance

Intervention
other
Design
quasi experimental
Sample size
22
Population
intellectual disability
Finding
positive
Magnitude
large

03Original abstract

BACKGROUND: There are over two billion telephones in use worldwide. Yet, for millions of Americans with intellectual disabilities (ID), access to the benefits of cellphone technology is limited because of deficits in literacy, numerical comprehension, the proliferation of features and shrinking size of cellphone hardware and user interfaces. Developments in smart phone technology and PDA-based cellphones provide an opportunity to make the social and safety benefits of cellphones more independently accessible to this population. METHOD: This project involved employment of universal design and other specialised software development methods to create a multimedia cellphone interface prototype which was compared with a typical mainstream cellphone in a usability evaluation for individuals with ID. Participants completed a structured set of incoming/outgoing phone tasks using both the experimental and control conditions. Usability measurements included the amount of assistance needed and errors made in completing the cellphone use sequence. RESULTS: A total of 22 individuals with ID participated in the research by engaging in a series of incoming and outgoing cellphone calls using both the multimedia cellphone prototype system and a mainstream Nokia 6360 cellphone. Test subjects required significantly less help (P = 0.001) and made significantly fewer errors (P < 0.001) when completing eight calls using the specialised multimedia phone system as compared with the mainstream phone. CONCLUSIONS: The statistical evidence of both usability results provide promising evidence of the feasibility of implementing universal design and other specialised software development methodologies for increasing independent access to the benefits of cellphone technologies for students and adults with ID. Issues related to designing cognitively accessible interfaces, study limitations and future directions are discussed.

Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR, 2008 · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2788.2008.01099.x