ORCID Number

0009-0006-9308-3539

Date of Award

Winter 2025

Access Type

Dissertation - Open Access

Degree Name

Doctor of Philosophy in Human Factors

Department

Human Factors and Behavioral Neurobiology

Committee Chair

Barbara S. Chaparro

Committee Chair Email

chaparb1@erau.edu

First Committee Member

Joseph R. Keebler

First Committee Member Email

keeblerj@erau.edu

Second Committee Member

Alex Chaparro

Second Committee Member Email

chapara3@erau.edu

Third Committee Member

Christina M. Frederick

Third Committee Member Email

frederic@erau.edu

College Dean

Jayathi Raghavan

Abstract

There has been an increasing importance placed on customization of products and desire for the product to allow the consumer to express themselves or fit into desired social groups with their product choices. Designing products to be inclusive can encompass these desires, as well as ensure that a wide range of user groups can use the products well. In general, there is little research in the field of perceptions of inclusivity with consumer technology products. Previous research has validated a scale to measure Perceptions of Technology Product Inclusivity (PTPI) with different user groups and technology product groups, however no research has looked at one technology product group specifically to understand how different design features affect inclusivity between different products in the same group. The following research are two studies focusing on smartphones, with the first study investigating a quantitative model on perceptions of inclusivity with smartphones between users with and without disabilities. This study addresses a gap in the literature by examining how specific design features, such as accessibility options and physical customizations, influence perceptions of inclusion and satisfaction among different user populations. Results showed that presence of a disability has a significant relationship to all the PTPI subscales, as well as overall satisfaction. Variables such as use of customizations, technology confidence, and age also contribute to perceptions of inclusivity, though these contributions differ between participants who report a disability and those who do not. The study results in a final proposed model, which can contribute to the literature regarding perceptions of technology inclusivity, what specific variables may contribute to perceptions of inclusivity with smartphones, and what relationship these variables may have to inclusivity.

The second study is qualitative, investigating differences in perceptions of inclusivity with smartphones that have been used for the first time, as compared to smartphones that users already own. Results revealed that the PTPI is sensitive enough to differentiate between four unique smartphones, but did not differentiate between two different smartphone models from the same brand. Participants generally reported they had enough information to respond to the PTPI statement items after using the smartphones for approximately 15 minutes, during which they completed four tasks. If participants did not feel they had enough information to respond to the PTPI statement items, the most common reasons given were because they were unfamiliar with the company that created the smartphone, or they were unsure about the reliability of the smartphone. The most common themes resulting from participant comments on why they reported a smartphone was made for someone like them were because the smartphone met their needs, or was user friendly. Conversely, participants reported the smartphone was not made for someone like them if the smartphone did not meet their needs, or was not user friendly. Results of this study may help to inform product designers or researchers on how the PTPI may be used in industry to measure perceptions of inclusivity between different competitors’ products.

Additional Files
GS9_Acceptance.pdf (482 kB)
Download

Share

COinS