On My Soapbox About “Accessibility”

As I’ve mentioned previously, researchers are often scared of the wrong things in research communication. I often talk about this issue in relation to the content, or “what,” we communicate. Today, I wanted to talk about “how.” Specifically, I want to talk about accessibility in research communication, and whether we’re concerned about the biggest issues.

Far and away, the most common accessibility concern I hear from workshop participants is color vision deficiency (i.e., color blindness). I haven’t seen a great estimate of how many people in the world are color-blind. Let’s say that, worst-case scenario, it’s about 4%.*

And then, when I’ve seen organizations take steps to improve access to communication products, the most common adaptations I see are for vision and hearing impairment. That includes accommodations like adding alt-text for images, checking and adjusting color contrast, and adding closed captions for videos and webinars. How many people need these accommodations? Roughly the same magnitude as those who experience color vision deficiency: Loss of visual acuity and blindness affect about 2% of Americans,** and about 5% of people worldwide have disabling hearing loss.***

Is it important to adapt materials for color blindness, other vision impairments, and hearing impairment? ABSOLUTELY.

That being said…what’s more common than color blindness, other vision impairments, and hearing impairment?

• School drop-out. About 9% of U.S. adults aged 25 or older have not completed high school.+
• Illiteracy. About 21% of U.S. adults have low levels of English literacy.++
• Below-average IQ. The average IQ in the U.S. is about 97.+++ About half the population falls below this number…because that’s how averages work.

And, frankly, you can be a native English speaker with a graduate degree and high IQ and still have a lot of trouble understanding the science-speak that researchers put out there.

In short, challenges to absorbing, understanding, and applying complex scientific findings are much more common than sensory challenges.

To make our communication fully accessible, we should implement accommodations for understanding. These can include:

1. Replacing jargon with plain-language equivalents.
2. Checking the readability of products (here’s how to do it in Word) and making adjustments to improve it.
3. Translating materials for non-native English-speaking audiences.
4. Including components, like diagrams and glossaries, that support understanding.
5. Involving members of the target audience in the development and review of communication products.

By combining accommodations for sensory challenges with accommodations for understanding, we can help to ensure that our messages reach everyone who needs to hear them.

Do you implement accommodations for understanding in your communications? Do you have specific accommodations to add to my list? Comment below!

* The most widely cited numbers are that, among people of northern European descent, 1 in 12 men and 1 in 200 women have red-green color vision defects. Rates are lower among other populations, and other types of color vision defects are extremely rare. (Source: https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/condition/color-vision-deficiency/#frequency)
** Source: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamaophthalmology/fullarticle/2779910
*** Source: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/deafness-and-hearing-loss
+ Source: https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/demo/tables/educational-attainment/2021/cps-detailed-tables/table-2-1.xlsx
++ Source: https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2019/2019179/index.asp
+++ Source: https://www.ulsterinstitute.org/ebook/THE%20INTELLIGENCE%20OF%20NATIONS%20-%20Richard%20Lynn,%20David%20Becker.pdf