Introduction
This is the all•Access podcast Access & Allies. My name is Rowan; I’m the co-President and Director of Communications for all•Access.
The goal of Access & Allies is to attempt to break down any digital accessibility topic under the sun to answer any and all of your questions around making digital tools more accessible. Thanks for tuning in, and if you prefer to read along, make sure to find this episode’s transcript in the notes — along with any resources I mention.
Now, let’s get started with today’s topic: One Size Fits Some.
Topic Intro
A lot of the time, with inclusive content creation, the mentality we’re used to is “Will it help?” But in this episode I want to argue that that isn’t the right question to be asking. The right question to be asking is “Could it help?” It’s a subtle change but it will make all the difference.
I recently attended a webinar by Deque on accessibility foundations which was great. Deque has a lot of great resources whether you’re starting your accessibility awareness journey or well on it, so we definitely suggest checking them out. And it was accessibility foundations, so it was mostly revision but it would good to have my current knowledge reaffirmed by people with other disabilities in the industry.
And it was a virtual presentation so of course I’m scrolling through the chat to see what other attendees are saying as well. There were lots of great resources and good conversations happening. And you know how in a busy Zoom chat, multiple conversations get layered and interspersed so it can be hard to trace back where one comment contextually applies? Well, I saw one such comment I couldn’t trace back to any specific conversation and all it said was “Well, dyslexia font is a controversial topic dot dot dot.”
“Hang on a moment. What?!” I wanted more information but the moment had passed, so I start going into a rabbit hole of research on dyslexia fonts in the midst of this webinar. Here I am, someone who has been recommending the use of these fonts and maybe they aren’t even useful anyway!
So in this episode, I want to dive a bit into the nuances of accessibility using dyslexia font as an example. I’ll explain the mentality we have at All Access when it comes to building digitally accessible content, and I’m going to use a study I came across as an important example in how there are a lot of different thought trains around the “best course of action” in accessibility work.
The Study
When researching “Why dyslexia font is controversial,” I came across someone’s article — not exactly a reputable source but I figured it was a starting point. Right off the bat, the article gave a reason for not using the font that I found rather misguided. They wrote that educators should never use Dyslexie because telling a child that they will suddenly be amazing at reading using this accommodative tool sets them up for failure and lowered self esteem.
Okay okay. First of all, anyone who tells a child that this one thing that’s been made to make it easier to navigate their disability is a cure-all and will suddenly make them amazing a something they generally face barriers with should very much reconsider their approach to disabilities and children. That’s ludicrous! It doesn’t matter which disability we are talking about, everyone experiences disability differently. There is never a one-size-fits-all solution to any disability.
I digress.
Through that article, I found a study the author was essentially summarising. When I went to check out the study, I was disappointed by the findings (surprise, surprise).
The study was a Springer Link publication titled “Dyslexie font does not benefit reading in children with or without dyslexia”. The point of the findings is clear, but, when I dug a bit deeper, here’s what I found:
When they divided the dyslectic readers in a group that read relatively well and one that read relatively poorly, they found a positive effect of the font in the poor dyslectic readers group. That is to say, they made fewer errors when reading the Dyslexie font than when reading in Arial.
This point was referring to a 2013 study by the University of Twente
The reasoning for improved reading may be misguided - instead of the weighted letters, it may be that the spacing is easier to navigate. They said:
“In a condition where they had not controlled for spacing, the Dyslexie font seemed to have a slight advantage over Arial (7% more words were read per minute), but after the fonts were matched for within-word and between-word spacing the effect disappeared. The authors therefore concluded that if the font Dyslexie aids reading, it is not because of its shape but rather because of the increase in word spacing. Thus, the claim by the designer Boer that letter shapes are responsible for the assumed increased legibility is doubtful.”
So the author’s statement here is saying “Dyslexie might help, but it isn’t for the reason the font creator claims it helps.” Which is good information in supporting dyselxia, but in the grand scheme of things loses the plot.
Something that came up for me while reading this study is that in one of the experiments they referenced, they were testing adults with dyslexia on their ability to read with Dyslexie font vs. Arial and found no difference between the two. So you’re telling me that after decades of struggling to read due to disability, you expect someone should be able to read quickly after putting the right font in front of them? It made me wonder if there was a fundamental misunderstanding of how this disability functions.
Bottom Line
In my experience of providing DyslexiaOpen, another font after the same purpose, I have heard how it has made it easier for people to focus on the messaging of the content. I’ve heard how people say, “Oh yeah, that is easier!” And whether it’s because the letters are uniquely weighted or the spacing between characters or words are different, does it really matter?
At the end of the day, it’s still good practice to offer Dyslexie, or DyslexiaOpen, or any other similar font as an option for people who find it useful.
Ultimately, digital accessibility is about reduced cognitive load. Less processing means high perceptibility, means higher engagement. (Remember that POUR, P O U R: Perceivable, Operable, Usable, and Robust). And that’s what we want: we want people engaging with the content we work so hard to produce.
When people don’t have to think so hard when they see your website or your digital document, they are more likely to actually spend time navigating it and seeing what you have to offer.
That’s why, when we approach accessible design at All Access, we believe that asking “Will it help?” is not the way to go. Instead, we ask “Could it help?”.
Sign Off
This episode has been an opinion-heavy piece by nature, so I’m wondering if you out there listening have any thoughts. Agree? Disagree? Has this raised more questions for you? I’m curious to know!
Thanks for listening to this episode of Access & Allies: One Size Fits Some. I encourage you to reach out through LinkedIn or email us at info@allaccess.dev if you have feedback.
It’s been fun talking at you and until next time on Access & Allies.
