Fig 1.
Mock-up version of the example of original New York Times website.
(1a) The original version of website. (1b) Low vision accessibility enhanced website. (1c) Cognitive accessibility enhanced website. (1d) Cognitive and low vision accessibility enhanced website. Note: These figures were created by the authors for illustrative purposes. They are not identical to the original and have been recreated to align with the CC BY 4.0 license.
Table 1.
Low vision accessibility enhancements.
Table 2.
Cognitive accessibility enhancements.
Table 3.
Questions on website readability, understandability, and article comprehension.
Fig 2.
(1) The experiment began with the DSPAN task. (2) The physiological measurement phase was repeated eight times for all conditions (four NYT and four BBC) for each participant. First, the website was displayed for 60 seconds. Participants viewed the website in a browser and they were free to scroll and read the articles. Next, three questions appeared in a row to assess comprehension, understanding, and readability. Participants had 45, 15, and 15 seconds respectively to respond verbally. (3) The experiment concluded with the NASA-TLX task.
Fig 3.
Accessibility enhancements and self-report questions.
(3a) The main effect of cognitive accessibility enhancements on website understandability. (3b) The main effect of low vision accessibility enhancements on website readability. Note: The estimated means are depicted with dots; the whiskers represent lower and upper confidence interval boundaries for the means.
Fig 4.
The influence of cognitive and low vision accessibility enhancements on focal attention dynamics during websites viewing.
(4a) Portraits the main effect of cognitive accessibility enhancements. (4b) Portraits the main effect of time-on-task. (4c) Portraits an interaction effect of cognitive and low vision accessibility enhancements. Note: The estimated means are depicted with dots and whiskers representing the lower and upper confidence interval boundaries of the means.
Table 4.
Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) for the main effect of time-on-task on the first-order eye movement measures.
Fig 5.
Interaction effect of working memory capacity, heart rate variability and cognitive enhancement on the time-on-task.
The graph shows the relationship between users’ working memory capacity and heart rate variability while reading websites with and without cognitive accessibility enhancements depending on the time-on-task epoch. Dot-dashed lines present slopes for the relationship between working memory capacity and HRV when reading websites with cognitive accessibility enhancement. Solid lines represent the slopes for the same relationship while reading websites without cognitive accessibility enhancements.
Fig 6.
The effect of time-on-task and low vision accessibility features on average heart rate inter-beat intervals during websites reading.
The graph shows effect of time-on-task and the average heart rate inter-beat intervals in low vision accessibility. Two lines represent different conditions of low vision accessibility. The solid line represents the original condition, showing a slight increase in heart rate variability from the beginning to the end of the task. The dashed line represents the enhanced condition. This line shows a stable and higher heart rate variability across the task with minimal change between the beginning and end.