Designing for Disabled People in Home Zones

6.0 Method of Analysis

6.1 Process of Analysis and Development of the Findings

Three main methods of data gathering were utilised in the project. These were:

• Observation and recording of site tests;
• On site completion of a questionnaire of experiences;
• Focus Group sessions.

The data gathered from each method was analysed and the full findings are described in Appendix C and Appendix D.

The following gives an overview of the method of analysis adopted for each method of data collection listed above.

6.2 Site Test Analysis (see also Section 7.0 Findings Report)

6.2.1 Aims

• Analyse the data collected in order to establish the main results and analyse the consistency of data from the site tests;
• Understand the subjective assessments of the search, navigation and safety strategies adopted by disabled and non-disabled people when using Homes Zones.

6.2.2 Methodology

6.2.2.1 Primary Data

The data generated from the 11 Home Zone site tests with 73 participants is in the form of questionnaire responses and notes made by the assessor. Detail of the methodology for data collection is outlined in Section 3.

Information was gathered on the test sites using a navigation test, which comprised a flowing narrative gathering the comments of participants as they moved through the sites and experienced various issues.

In this process:

• The frequency of an occurrence was gathered by categorising the responses of participants against factors such as, for example, design typology and interaction amongst factors/vehicles.
• Comments were then analysed against the relevant factor.

In that respect, only actual comments made during the tests are being used in the analysis.

Where the report shows that 18% of blind and partially sighted people identified problems using the building line to navigate, it is not appropriate to assume that, by contrast, 82% did not experience such problems, given that there are likely to be a number of factors in the built environment that will affect whether people have a positive or negative experience of using the building to navigate. Where appropriate, such issues have been further considered against the general positive and negative comments received in the tests.

6.2.2.2 Data Coding and Data Input

Much of the data captured from the site tests is qualitative. The 'questionnaire about general issues and experience' gave participants the opportunity to rate the Home Zone on different scales and so is easier to categorise in this regard.

The 'semi-structured questionnaire from walk through' is a flowing narrative and so is slightly more complex to analyse, consequently a coding system is used for this data. This coding system was developed through findings from the literature review of the key design features within a Home Zone that might affect wayfinding and/or safety for disabled people. These design features were then used as the key headings for the coding system under which to allocate the data from the site tests. Ensuring all data could fit these raw headings was an ongoing process throughout data input and slight amendments were made as required. The system therefore assigned interpretative tags to text based on relevant categories and themes (Cope, 2003). This method is also encouraged in the Magenta Book (Government Chief Social Researchers Office, 2004) which outlines "Thematic data ordering in which raw data from different cases are brought together under thematic headings" (Government Chief Social Researchers Office, 2004).

This means that the data is broken down into statements under headings such as design features e.g. orientation cues, surface materials, colour contrast, surface texture, and also interactions, strategies and tactics e.g. freedom of movement, speed of vehicles etc and entered into a qualitative software program (XSight, QSR International). Within this, statements are broadly classified as to whether they were positive or negative. This allows the study to compare any patterns experienced with different features / layouts and experiences of people with similar disabilities.

Whilst the study has indicated the number and percentage of people making different statements, this is not intended to be interpreted for use in prioritising recommendations. Rather the proportions are intended to show the overall context of opinion and stated perceptions of the participants.

6.2.2.3 Analysis of the Data

The coded data was analysed in the following ways:

1. Commonalities experienced by people with similar disabilities

Considering blind people, partially sighted people, deaf or hard of hearing people, people with a reduced level of physical mobility, people with learning disabilities and any others:

• Outlining any common issues highlighted by participants regarding navigation and safety, suggestions for improvement and comparison to traditional street environment;
• Looking at any particular features, interactions, strategies and tactics experienced by people with similar disabilities in the Home Zone environment.

2. Common issues experienced with Home Zone design features, layouts and interactions

Considering factors such as delineation of shared surface, colour contrast, surface texture, gateways, provision of footways, width of routes, lighting, seating, parking, and maintenance.

Investigating any common issues highlighted by participants regarding navigation and safety, suggestions for improvement and comparison to traditional street environments.

3. Outline of each Home Zone

Considering any common issues highlighted by participants regarding navigation and safety. Looking at any commonalities experienced with design features, interactions, strategies and tactics.

In addition this section took into account casualty statistics (STATS 19) and user levels at each of the sites which had been collected through desktop research.

6.3 Questionnaire on General Issues and Experiences

6.3.1 Aims

• To collect the general experiences of site test participants with specific reference to safety and navigation;
• To collect suggestions and recommendations for improvements from participants;
• To establish the views of participants on comparisons between Home Zone and traditional street environments.

6.3.2 Methodology

Scaled ordinal responses meant analysis was straightforward. The data collected via the open-ended responses was transferred to the data for the site tests and categorised under the relevant headings.

6.3.3 Analysis

The responses to each question were analysed by the:

• percentage of responses to the question across all sites;
• percentage of responses to the question at each site;
• number of responses to the question at each site.

This questionnaire was included to ensure that there was a controlled structure to the information gathered on navigation and safety around the site and to gather an overall impression of the participant on the issues experienced during the site tests. It also enabled comparison and commonalities between the different sites and also traditional street environments.

6.4 Focus Group Analysis

6.4.1 Aims of this Task

• To analyse the recommended solutions to problems identified in the site tests.

6.4.2 Methodology

Identifying issues and developing solutions was a key objective for the Focus Group sessions. It was also considered essential to move the emphasis away from focusing on problems and towards ensuring that the potential solutions were also identified and discussed. Therefore, the focus group discussions were recorded and written up. In the sessions, discussions were allocated to the categories and typology for the site test coding for both design and non-design issues, which enabled cross analysis with the site tests.

6.4.3 Analysis

Analysis of the Focus Group discussions included considering the positive and negative issues identified. It also concentrated on the level of agreement or disagreement of potential solutions to the issues identified, and especially differences of opinion between the different disability groups, disabled people and design professionals participating.

• Personal mobility
• Top of page