How to Develop Accessible Web Interfaces for Deaf People?
Gênesis Medeiros do Carmo, Débora Maria Barroso Paiva, Maria Istela Cagnin · 2019 · Proceedings of the 18th Brazilian Symposium on Human Factors in Computing Systems (IHC) · doi:10.1145/3357155.3358437
Summary
This paper presents a systematic mapping study examining how web interfaces are being designed and implemented for deaf and hard of hearing users. The authors searched six databases and 17 conferences from 2005-2018, screening 469 publications to select 29 primary studies. The mapping distinguishes between pre-lingual deafness (born deaf or losing hearing before language acquisition, typically using sign language as primary communication) and post-lingual deafness (losing hearing after language acquisition, typically literate in written/spoken language). Of the 29 studies, 25 addressed post-lingual deafness, 14 addressed pre-lingual deafness, and 11 covered other hearing-related disabilities. The study extracted 17 accessibility requirements from the primary studies and mapped them to WCAG 2.1 success criteria, finding that while the literature collectively covered 85.71% of relevant WCAG criteria, individually only 6.9% of studies covered the majority of important criteria for hearing impairment. Only 37.93% of the 29 selected studies presented requirements linked to at least one WCAG 2.1 success criterion.
Key findings
The mapping revealed significant gaps in accessible web development for deaf users. Only 8 of 29 studies (27.6%) used any framework or API, and only 7 (24.1%) mentioned assistive technology resources — a notable absence given that developers need practical tools, not just guidelines. HTML was the most cited programming language at 85.71% of the 7 studies that mentioned languages. The 17 extracted accessibility requirements included: providing sign language video (Libras) content, presenting captions on videos with sign language, offering adaptive interfaces based on disability type and preferences, providing sufficient time for comprehension, offering sign language and text dictionaries, providing help systems, offering simple interfaces, allowing vibration or visual notifications instead of audio, substituting audio with images/text/sign language, offering sign language recognition and translation, and providing alternative text for non-textual content. The study found that approximately 38% of selected works addressed hearing disability alongside other disability types rather than focusing specifically on deaf users, and that most assistive technologies remain limited to specific cases rather than addressing the full range of deaf user needs. A significant finding was the disparity between solutions for post-lingual deaf users (who read written language) versus pre-lingual deaf users (who communicate primarily in sign language), with the latter being substantially underserved.
Relevance
This systematic mapping exposes a critical gap in web accessibility: while WCAG and other standards provide general guidelines, there is a striking lack of practical developer tools, specific recommendations, and targeted assistive technologies for deaf and hard of hearing web users. The distinction between pre-lingual and post-lingual deafness is particularly important for practitioners — the accessibility needs of a sign language user who may have limited written language literacy are fundamentally different from those of someone who became deaf later in life. The 17 requirements extracted and mapped to WCAG criteria serve as a practical checklist for developers building deaf-accessible interfaces. The finding that most studies treat hearing disability as an afterthought alongside other disabilities highlights the need for focused research on deaf web accessibility. For organizations serving diverse deaf communities, the research underscores the importance of sign language content (not just captions), adaptive interfaces, and vibration/visual notification alternatives to audio cues.
Tags: deaf accessibility · hard of hearing · web accessibility · systematic mapping · sign language · captioning · WCAG · web development
Standards referenced: WCAG 2.0 · WCAG 2.1 · WAI-ARIA · Section 508 · eMAG