Whether we’re auditing against the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) or user testing, we’re trying to find accessibility issues, but there’s a big difference between the two services.
Audit Definition
An audit is the formal, comprehensive evaluation of a digital asset’s accessibility conducted by one or more technical accessibility experts. During an audit, the expert is essentially grading the digital asset against a technical standard, such as WCAG 2.1 AA.
The primary purpose of an accessibility audit is to identify all instances where a digital asset does not meet accessibility requirements under a given technical standard.
Note that when it comes to accessibility, audits must be comprehensive and conducted manually. There is no such thing as a “quick audit” or an “automated audit” (e.g., a scan).
User Testing Definition
User testing is the testing of a digital asset conducted by an accessibility professional with one or more disabilities, typically using assistive technology.
User testing is typically conducted by a professional who is blind or visually impaired and using a screen reader. However, user testing can be conducted by professionals with different disabilities and assistive technologies.
Of course, user testing can also be conducted by non-professionals with disabilities, but testing services usually involve professionals who are experienced in testing digital assets.
Key Differences
Approach and Scope
Whereas an audit is comprehensive and thorough, user testing is more experiential and is limited to a set amount of time (e.g., 30 minutes).
Purpose
Whereas an audit is more clinical, user testing is more practical: are there any issues that the tester comes across when testing a digital asset? Can they complete common tasks without encountering any difficulties?
Coverage
There will likely be some accessibility issues that user testing wouldn’t uncover on its own. For example, if a completely blind user is testing a website, they wouldn’t find any color contrast issues. This is one reason why user testing is best viewed as a supplement to an audit, not as a replacement.
When to Use User Testing
User testing is best leveraged as a second tier filter for finding any possible accessibility issues that are missed during an audit. However, it’s important to note that remediation and validation (or an audit of the initial issues) should be completed before the user testing takes place. Otherwise, you’ll just be finding issues that could have already been discovered.
There’s no point in having a user tester spend their limited time encountering obvious issues when those issues could have been addressed earlier. User testing is most valuable when focusing on the nuanced usability aspects that technical conformance could potentially not catch (e.g., automatic page refresh results in lost content).
Summary
User testing is an optional service that nicely complements audit and remediation services well. Documentation of user testing also shows good faith effort in your accessibility efforts.
However, if you’re serious about digital accessibility compliance, an audit is 100% necessary to reach full WCAG conformance. The combination of both – audit first, remediation second, and user testing third – creates the most robust approach to ensuring your digital assets are truly accessible to all users.
If you need help with an audit and/or user testing, we’d be happy to help. Just send us a message and we’ll be right back with you.
