This site presents findings from Intopia’s Assistive Technology survey of 218 people in Australia and New Zealand. We asked about the devices and tools people use, how satisfied they are, and what barriers they face.
The aim was to build a clear picture of how assistive technology is being used right now. The findings are for accessibility practitioners, designers, developers, and policy makers who want to better support the people who rely on assistive technology to access services and products online.
The survey was open to people aged 18 and over in Australia or New Zealand. Participants were asked about the devices they use and the tools they rely on. They were also asked about their experiences online.
The survey results are divided into six sections. Each section covers a different part of the findings.
A note on terms. 'Assistive technology' means any tool or device that helps people with disabilities use technology more easily. This includes screen readers, voice control, and braille displays. 'Adaptive strategies' means changes people make to their device settings. Examples include making text bigger or turning on dark mode.
Where “n=” appears, “n” means the number of respondents in a given group or who answered a given question.
Our partnerships
We couldn’t have undertaken this survey without the support of these amazing organisations. Thanks to them, we were able to ensure the Assistive Technology Survey 2025 had a diverse representation across Australia and New Zealand.
Overview
The tools work. The websites don't.
Assistive technology users are not asking for better tools. They are asking for more accessible digital experiences. This survey tells you why, and what to do about it.
Who took part
The survey went out to Australia (75%) and New Zealand (25%), with 9 in 10 respondents living with a disability, impairment, or chronic condition. Blindness was the most reported (38%), followed by neurodivergence (30%) and physical disability (28%). Nearly half of those with a disability (49%) live with two or more conditions at the same time. This matters for anyone designing, building, or testing digital products, as many assistive technology users are not managing a single access need.
Key findings
-
Don't design for a single disability profile.
Nearly half of people with a disability in our survey reported having two or more conditions.
-
Screen reader support is non-negotiable.
Our survey found that more than half of desktop and mobile users rely on screen readers.
-
Accessibility must work across devices.
8 in 10 respondents use a desktop and a mobile phone or tablet online.
-
Don't deprioritise desktop.
Nearly 8 in 10 respondents use a desktop when a form is long.
-
The tools aren't broken. Your website is.
The top reported barriers were website issues, not limitations of assistive tech.
-
AI is part of how people with disability get things done.
Over half of those surveyed use AI tools or features to help with online tasks.
Devices and access
Most respondents access digital services and products using both desktop and mobile devices (80%). Windows is the dominant desktop platform (87%) and Apple iPhone the most common mobile device (51%). People are clear about which device they prefer for different tasks, with long forms and complex tasks undertaken on desktop, and social media and banking on mobile. This pattern has implications for where accessibility efforts in digital product design could be focused.
Assistive technology use
Most assistive tech users in this survey are experienced, as evidenced by 55% of respondents on desktop using assistive tech for 10 years or more. Participants who use screen readers for both desktop and mobile featured heavily in the survey findings (61% desktop and 54% mobile). Access needs align with different disabilities, leading to a diverse range of assistive tech and adaptive strategies. People with blindness rely heavily on screen readers and braille displays, and people with low vision are almost as likely to use a screen magnifier as a screen reader. People with physical access needs have the highest rate of speech recognition use in this survey. These differences are important, as it shows that ‘assistive tech users' are not one, homogenous audience.
Satisfaction
Overall, respondents are satisfied with their chosen assistive tech. Braille displays and screen readers score highest across platforms. Apple VoiceOver on iPhone receives the strongest satisfaction rating among screen readers (88% positive), and braille displays score highest overall (89% positive). Windows speech recognition scores the lowest of any assistive tech type (43% positive). Satisfaction and barriers tell a connected story. Screen reader users are the most satisfied with their tools, however they also report experiencing the most barriers online. Assistive tools are working; many websites are not.
Barriers online
Respondents described up to three barriers they face when using their assistive technology online. Across all tools and both platforms, 757 responses were collected and grouped into 24 themes. The top five:
- Inaccessible or poorly coded web pages
- Popups, overlays and modals
- Cognitive load
- Time cost
- Missing form labels
Artificial intelligence
More than half of respondents (59%) now use AI tools to help with online tasks. Most use general-purpose tools such as ChatGPT and Siri. Fewer than 15% use AI features built into their existing assistive technology tool, such as JAWS or Dragon. This suggests these features are either not well known or not yet widely available. Among non-users of AI, 58% actively prefer non-AI solutions. A further 41% have privacy or security concerns. Nearly 30% simply do not know of any AI tools that support accessibility, indicating a clear knowledge gap and opportunities for inclusive uses of AI technology.
Who took part
This section describes the people who took part in the survey. It covers where they live, their age, gender, employment, and their disability, impairment, or chronic conditions.
Most respondents were based in Australia. Around a quarter were from New Zealand.
| Country | Responses % |
|---|---|
| Australia | 74% |
| New Zealand | 26% |
n=218 respondents.
Respondents ranged in age from 18 to 90. The average age was 52. The most common age group was 35 to 44. People aged 65 and over made up nearly a quarter of all respondents.
| Age group | Responses % |
|---|---|
| 18 to 24 | 3% |
| 25 to 34 | 11% |
| 35 to 44 | 22% |
| 45 to 54 | 18% |
| 55 to 64 | 22% |
| 65 to 74 | 17% |
| 75 and over | 7% |
n=218 respondents. Mean age: 52.3 | Median: 53 | Youngest: 18 | Oldest: 90
Just over half of respondents reported their gender as a woman or female. Around 38% reported man or male. Nine respondents stated their gender as non-binary.
| Gender | Responses % |
|---|---|
| Woman or female | 54% |
| Man or male | 38% |
| Non-binary | 4% |
| I'd rather not say | 3% |
| Other or self-described | 1% |
| Not stated | 1% |
n=218 respondents.
More than half of the respondents were in paid work at the time of the survey. The next largest group was retired or on a pension. A small number gave their own descriptions that did not fit the provided options.
| Employment status | Responses % |
|---|---|
| Employed (full-time, part-time, self-employed, or casual) | 55% |
| Retired or on a pension | 23% |
| Unemployed | 5% |
| Not able to work | 4% |
| Student | 3% |
| Given up looking for work | 3% |
| Home duties | 2% |
| Unpaid carer | 1% |
| Other or not stated | 4% |
n=218 respondents. 'Other or not stated' includes five free-text responses, such as 'volunteer advocate' and 'blind pensioner', and two non-responses.
An accessibility barrier could be a lost transaction.
Employment among the majority of respondents suggests an active consumer base with money to spend. These potential customers are also likely to encounter inaccessible digital products and services, which may push them toward competitors who provide a more accessible experience.
Most people in the survey live with a disability, reflecting the survey's focus on assistive tech.
| Option | Responses % |
|---|---|
| Yes | 91% |
| No | 8% |
| Not stated | 1% |
n=218 respondents.
Types of disability
Blindness was the most common, followed by neurodivergence and physical disability. Many respondents reported more than one condition.
| Disability type | Responses % |
|---|---|
| Blindness | 34% |
| Neurodivergent | 28% |
| Physical disability | 25% |
| Low vision | 17% |
| Deaf or hard of hearing | 16% |
| Mental health or psychosocial disability | 14% |
| Neurological disability | 7% |
| Head injury, stroke, or acquired brain injury | 6% |
| Deafblind | 3% |
| Intellectual disability | 2% |
n=197 respondents who reported a disability. Respondents could select more than one type. Totals exceed 100%.
Respondents also had the option to enter other disabilities that were not listed. We received over 40 entries that included chronic pain, long COVID, fibromyalgia and repetitive strain injury (RSI).
Living with more than one condition
This matters for design and accessibility, as many assistive tech users are managing multiple access needs at once.
| Number of conditions | Count | Responses % |
|---|---|---|
| 1 condition | 101 | 51% |
| 2 or more conditions | 96 | 49% |
n=197 respondents who reported at least one disability type.
Devices people use
This section looks at the devices people use to go online. It covers desktops, laptops, mobile phones, and tablets. It also looks at how people choose between devices for different tasks.
Most respondents use a desktop or laptop to do tasks online. Among those who do, Windows is by far the most common operating system (OS).
Desktop or laptop use for online tasks
| Option | Responses % |
|---|---|
| Yes | 92% |
| No | 8% |
n=218 respondents.
Of the 17 people who don't use a desktop or laptop, nine find other devices easier, three don't have access to a device, and two have a broken or old device. Three gave other reasons, and one mentioned physical discomfort when sitting at a desk, prohibiting them from using a desktop device.
Types of laptops or desktops used to complete tasks online
| Operating system | Responses % |
|---|---|
| Windows | 87% |
| Apple macOS | 10% |
| Linux | 2% |
| Other | 1% |
n=201 desktop users.
Most respondents also use a mobile phone or tablet online. Apple iPhones are the most common device, used by just over half of all mobile users.
Mobile phone or tablet use for online tasks
| Option | Responses % |
|---|---|
| Yes | 88% |
| No | 12% |
| Not stated | 1% |
n=218 respondents.
Of the 25 people who don't use a mobile or tablet, 15 find other devices easier. Three don't have access to one. Some gave detailed reasons. For example, one person uses a phone with a tactile keypad because they can't use a touchscreen due to their disability. Another said they prefer their PC because they’ve used it since the early days of the internet.
Types of mobile phones or tablet devices used to complete tasks online
| Mobile type | Responses % |
|---|---|
| Apple iPhone | 51% |
| Android phone | 35% |
| Apple iPad | 8% |
| Android tablet | 4% |
| Other | 2% |
n=192 mobile or tablet users.
All respondents use either a desktop or mobile device to complete tasks online, with 8 in 10 respondents using both.
| Device combination | Responses % |
|---|---|
| Both desktop and mobile | 80% |
| Desktop only | 12% |
| Mobile only | 8% |
| Neither | 0% |
n=218 respondents.
People were asked which device they prefer for five common online tasks. Respondents in this survey prefer desktops for complex or important tasks and prefer mobile devices for quick or social tasks.
Filling in long forms stands out, with almost 8 in 10 respondents using their desktop. Banking and social media are the opposite, with respondents preferring the use of a mobile phone for both. The results can offer insight for prioritising task design for different contexts.
| Task | Desktop % | Mobile % | Tablet % | Any device % | Don't do online % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Online shopping (n=217) | 50 | 28 | 7 | 10 | 5 |
| Online banking (n=215) | 30 | 53 | 6 | 7 | 4 |
| Social media (n=217) | 16 | 49 | 8 | 9 | 17 |
| Long forms (n=216) | 79 | 6 | 7 | 5 | 2 |
| Short forms (n=217) | 45 | 28 | 8 | 18 | 1 |
| Task | Desktop % | Mobile % | Tablet % | Any device % | Don't do online % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Online shopping (n=217) | 50% | 28% | 7% | 10% | 5% |
| Online banking (n=215) | 30% | 53% | 6% | 7% | 4% |
| Social media (n=217) | 16% | 49% | 8% | 9% | 17% |
| Long forms (n=216) | 79% | 6% | 7% | 5% | 2% |
| Short forms (n=217) | 45% | 28% | 8% | 18% | 1% |
n = number of responses for that activity. Darker shading indicates a higher percentage of respondents. 17% of respondents do not use social media at all.
Assistive technology usage
This section covers how long people have been using assistive tech, the types they use most, and the settings they change to make their devices easier.
Respondents in the survey have used desktop assistive tech for far longer than mobile. This might help explain why users have, on average, spent less time using mobile assistive tech.
Desktop (n=139)
Mobile (n=124)
| Device | Under 1 year | 1 to 3 years | 4 to 9 years | 10 years or more |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Desktop (n=139) | 5% | 21% | 19% | 55% |
| Mobile (n=124) | 7% | 20% | 31% | 42% |
n = number of respondents who use that device.
Among the 98 people who use assistive tech on both platforms, 44 have been doing so for 10 years or more. These are the most experienced assistive tech users in the survey.
The top pairing from this survey is screen reader and braille display (20%). Other pairings include reading or text-to-speech tool and screen magnifier (11%), screen reader and screen magnifier (10%) and reading or text-to-speech tool and speech recognition (9%).
For mobile, the use of multiple assistive technologies is actually more common (51%) than on desktop (45%). The top mobile pairing is reading or text-to-speech tools and screen magnifier (16%).
| Assistive tech type | Desktop % (n=137) | Mobile % (n=125) |
|---|---|---|
| Screen reader | 61% | 54% |
| Reading or text-to-speech tool | 29% | 34% |
| Screen magnifier | 24% | 33% |
| Braille display | 20% | 13% |
| Speech recognition or voice control | 19% | 31% |
| Alternative input devices or switches | 6% | 3% |
| Other | 19% | 10% |
n = the number of respondents in that group. Respondents could select more than one type. Total exceeds 100%.
Screen readers are the most common assistive tech on both desktop and mobile. On desktop, screen readers are used far more than any other type. On mobile, the gap is smaller. Screen magnification, text-to-speech, and voice control are all used at similar rates.
Voice control is used by nearly 1 in 3 mobile assistive tech users. On desktop, it's fewer than 1 in 5. The logic could be that voice input fits well with touch-based devices. Additionally, other technologies are available on desktop that aren’t available on mobile, such as a wireless head mouse. It’s also worth noting that braille display use is higher on desktop (20%) than mobile (13%). Braille displays are often used alongside screen readers and can incorporate standard QWERTY keyboard layouts. Therefore, a braille display can be both an assistive device and a keyboard.
In addition to assistive tech, we asked about the techniques and workarounds respondents often use with their devices to improve their experience.
On desktop, the most common change is increasing text size or using zoom. For mobile, autofill for forms and passwords stands out.
| Adaptive strategy | Desktop % (n=138) | Mobile % (n=135) |
|---|---|---|
| Larger text, zoom, or display size | 60% | 59% |
| Autofill (forms or passwords) | 56% | 65% |
| High contrast, dark mode, or colour inversion | 50% | 51% |
| Predictive text or spell check | 45% | 47% |
| Captions or subtitles for videos | 40% | 36% |
| Pinch-to-zoom | NA | 39% |
| Audio description for videos | 28% | 33% |
| Keyboard only (no mouse) | 27% | NA |
| Browser extensions for reading or navigation | 20% | NA |
| Bluetooth keyboard | NA | 21% |
n = the number of respondents in that group. Respondents could select more than one type. Total exceeds 100%. Some strategies apply only to one device type.
NA in the table indicates that the adaptive strategy is not relevant for that device type.
Looking at assistive tech types and adaptive strategies together reveals two distinct access patterns. Screen reader and braille display users in this survey are more likely to use adaptive strategies that reduce manual input and reliance on visuals. For example, 37% of desktop screen reader users also navigate keyboard-only (no mouse). On mobile, 51% of screen reader users also use audio description.
Screen magnifier users change their device settings to enhance visual support. On desktop, 85% also use zoom/text size, and 78% use high contrast or dark mode. On mobile, 88% use larger text and 61% use pinch-to-zoom alongside the magnifier. They're not relying on the magnifier alone, but rather combining other visual adaptive strategies.
Respondents combine speech recognition and autofill (59% on desktop and 67% on mobile). On both desktop and mobile, people are trying to reduce the burden of text input. Speech recognition or voice control users are also seeking to minimise the amount of typing they do.
Windows and Apple users have different patterns of assistive tech use. Windows users are more likely to use screen readers as their main assistive tech. Apple users are more likely to use reading or text-to-speech tools. Note: the Apple desktop group is small in this survey (13 assistive tech users). These figures give a direction rather than a representative finding. That said, many assistive tech types are made for Windows, and Apple’s app ecosystem is quite closed off.
| Assistive tech type | Windows % (n=121) | Apple % (n=13) |
|---|---|---|
| Screen reader | 64% | 39% |
| Reading or text-to-speech tool | 28% | 46% |
| Screen magnifier | 23% | 23% |
| Speech recognition or voice control | 19% | 31% |
| Braille display | 22% | 15% |
| Alternative input devices | 6% | 8% |
n = the number of respondents in that group. Respondents could select more than one type. Total exceeds 100%.
There is a clear difference between iPhone and Android assistive tech users. iPhone users mainly use screen readers, and Android users spread their assistive tech use more evenly. Screen magnification is used most on Android, with reading or text-to-speech tools and Speech recognition or voice control relatively similar.
| Assistive tech type | iPhone % (n=71) | Android % (n=30) |
|---|---|---|
| Screen reader | 65% | 43% |
| Screen magnifier or zoom | 18% | 57% |
| Reading or text-to-speech tool | 27% | 43% |
| Speech recognition or voice control | 30% | 40% |
| Braille display | 23% | 0% |
n = the number of respondents in that group. Respondents could select more than one type. Total exceeds 100%.
Insights into assistive technology
This section looks at the specific assistive tech tools people use. It also examines how assistive tech use varies by disability type and age.
Different disabilities lead to very different patterns of assistive tech use.
| Disability type | Screen reader % | Braille display % | Screen magnifier % | Reading/TTS % | Speech rec. % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blindness (n=74) | 81 | 32 | 18 | 12 | 9 |
| Low vision (n=36) | 39 | 6 | 42 | 28 | 17 |
| Deaf or hard of hearing (n=34) | 29 | 12 | 15 | 18 | 6 |
| Deafblind (n=6) | 67 | 33 | 17 | 17 | 17 |
| Neurodivergent (n=60) | 15 | 7 | 17 | 20 | 15 |
| Physical disability (n=56) | 23 | 2 | 11 | 16 | 27 |
| Mental health or psychosocial (n=30) | 23 | 10 | 20 | 20 | 13 |
| Neurological disability (n=15) | 20 | 7 | 7 | 33 | 20 |
| Acquired Brain Injury (ABI) or stroke (n=12) | 8 | 0 | 17 | 17 | 17 |
| Intellectual disability (n=5) | 40 | 0 | 20 | 20 | 0 |
| Disability type | Screen reader % | Braille display % | Screen magnifier % | Reading/TTS % | Speech rec. % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blindness (n=74) | 81% | 32% | 18% | 12% | 9% |
| Low vision (n=36) | 39% | 6% | 42% | 28% | 17% |
| Deaf or hard of hearing (n=34) | 29% | 12% | 15% | 18% | 6% |
| Deafblind (n=6) | 67% | 33% | 17% | 17% | 17% |
| Neurodivergent (n=60) | 15% | 7% | 17% | 20% | 15% |
| Physical disability (n=56) | 23% | 2% | 11% | 16% | 27% |
| Mental health or psychosocial (n=30) | 23% | 10% | 20% | 20% | 13% |
| Neurological disability (n=15) | 20% | 7% | 7% | 33% | 20% |
| Acquired Brain Injury (ABI) or stroke (n=12) | 8% | 0% | 17% | 17% | 17% |
| Intellectual disability (n=5) | 40% | 0% | 20% | 20% | 0% |
n = the number of respondents in that group. Figures show the percentage of all respondents in each age group who use that assistive tech type on desktop. Alternative input devices are excluded from this table due to low response numbers. Darker shading indicates a higher percentage of respondents. TTS stands for text-to-speech.
There are a few patterns that stand out. Respondents with blindness rely heavily on screen readers (81%) and braille displays (32%). People in this survey with low vision are almost as likely to use a screen magnifier (42%) and a screen reader (39%), suggesting they may have different needs from people who are blind. People with a physical disability have the highest rate of speech recognition use (27%) in the survey, and those with neurological conditions lean most heavily on reading or text-to-speech tools (33%).
Younger respondents (18 to 34) use assistive tech less than older groups, even though disability rates in this survey are quite similar. This might be because younger people rely more on built-in settings on their device or operating system. It may also reflect different types of disability or a later diagnosis for different conditions.
| Age group | Screen reader % | Braille display % | Screen magnifier % | Reading/TTS % | Speech rec. % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18 to 34 (n=30) | 27 | 17 | 7 | 17 | 7 |
| 35 to 44 (n=49) | 22 | 10 | 12 | 14 | 8 |
| 45 to 54 (n=40) | 43 | 13 | 18 | 18 | 20 |
| 55 to 64 (n=47) | 49 | 19 | 19 | 15 | 11 |
| 65 and over (n=52) | 42 | 8 | 17 | 27 | 15 |
| Age group | Screen reader % | Braille display % | Screen magnifier % | Reading/TTS % | Speech rec. % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18 to 34 (n=30) | 27% | 17% | 7% | 17% | 7% |
| 35 to 44 (n=49) | 22% | 10% | 12% | 14% | 8% |
| 45 to 54 (n=40) | 43% | 13% | 18% | 18% | 20% |
| 55 to 64 (n=47) | 49% | 19% | 19% | 15% | 11% |
| 65 and over (n=52) | 42% | 8% | 17% | 27% | 15% |
n = the number of respondents in that group. Figures show the percentage of all respondents in each age group who use that assistive tech type on desktop. Alternative input devices are excluded from this table due to low response numbers. Darker shading indicates a higher percentage of respondents. TTS stands for text-to-speech.
JAWS is the most used screen reader on desktop, with NVDA coming in second. On mobile, VoiceOver (Apple) is used by nearly three times as many respondents as TalkBack (Android). This reflects the larger number of iPhone users in the survey sample.
Of the 41 JAWS users, 28 (68%) are on the current version (JAWS 2026). Ten use JAWS 2025, and only three respondents use an older version. Importantly, the survey shows 93% of JAWS users are on a recent release (2024 - 2026).
Types of screen readers used with desktops or laptops
| Desktop screen reader type | Responses % |
|---|---|
| JAWS (Windows) | 51% |
| NVDA (Windows) | 34% |
| VoiceOver (Apple) | 6% |
| Narrator (Windows) | 4% |
| Other or unspecified | 7% |
n=81 desktop screen reader users.
Types of screen readers used with mobile phones or tablet devices
| Mobile or tablet screen reader type | Responses % |
|---|---|
| VoiceOver (Apple) | 70% |
| TalkBack (Android) | 16% |
| Voice Assistant (Android) | 5% |
| Other or unspecified | 9% |
n=67 mobile or tablet screen reader users.
On desktop, Windows Magnifier is the most common tool. ZoomText and built-in display scaling are also widely used. On mobile, 95% of magnifier users rely on their device's built-in zoom and only two use a third-party app. This may be a combination of satisfaction and ease of access with the in-built zoom, removing the need to download a third-party app.
Types of screen magnifiers used with desktops or laptops
| Desktop screen magnifier type | Responses % |
|---|---|
| Windows Magnifier | 28% |
| ZoomText | 22% |
| Increase display size (built-in scaling) | 22% |
| Increase font size (built-in) | 22% |
| Zoom for Apple or Linux KDE magnifier | 6% |
n=32 desktop screen magnifier users.
Types of screen magnifiers used with mobile phones or tablet devices
| Mobile or tablet screen magnifier type | Responses % |
|---|---|
| Built-in device or browser zoom | 95% |
| Third-party app from an app store | 5% |
n=40 mobile or tablet screen magnifier users.
On desktop, the built-in text-to-speech feature is the top choice (46% of desktop text-to-speech users). On mobile, 79% of text-to-speech users rely on their device's built-in feature. There are a variety of other tools used, including ABBYY FineReader, Letterly, ChatGPT, and Read&Write used as an Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC) device. This indicates how creatively people combine tools to meet their needs.
Types of reading or text-to-speech tools used with desktops or laptops
| Desktop reading or text-to-speech tool | Responses % |
|---|---|
| Built-in browser or OS feature | 46% |
| Read Aloud | 16% |
| NaturalReader | 8% |
| Read&Write | 8% |
| Other tools | 22% |
n=37 desktop reading or text-to-speech tool users.
Types of reading or text-to-speech tools used with mobile phones or tablet devices
| Mobile or tablet reading or text-to-speech tool | Count | Responses % |
|---|---|---|
| Built-in browser or OS feature | 33 | 79% |
| NaturalReader | 2 | 5% |
| Other tools | 7 | 17% |
n=42 mobile or tablet reading or text-to-speech tool users. 'Other' includes Read&Write, Dolphin EasyReader, Letterly AI, Google Translate, and Siri.
Experiences with assistive technology
This section looks at how satisfied people are with their assistive tech. It also covers how often they hit barriers online and what those barriers are.
We asked respondents to rate their level of satisfaction with their assistive tech.
Speech recognition on Windows desktop is the exception, with fewer than half of its users (43%) reporting satisfaction. No other assistive tech type scores that low.
Satisfaction with desktop assistive technology
| Desktop assistive technology | Positive % | Neutral % | Negative % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Braille display (n=28) | 89 | 11 | 0 |
| Screen reader (Windows/Linux) (n=75) | 87 | 10 | 3 |
| Alternative input (n=7) | 86 | 0 | 14 |
| Screen reader; VoiceOver (Apple) (n=5) | 80 | 0 | 20 |
| Speech recognition (Apple) (n=4) | 75 | 25 | 0 |
| Screen magnifier (Windows/Linux) (n=29) | 72 | 21 | 7 |
| Reading/text-to-speech tool (n=38) | 63 | 26 | 11 |
| Speech recognition (Windows) (n=23) | 43 | 35 | 22 |
| Desktop assistive technology | Positive % | Neutral % | Negative % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Braille display (n=28) | 89% | 11% | 0% |
| Screen reader (Windows/Linux) (n=75) | 87% | 10% | 3% |
| Alternative input (n=7) | 86% | 0% | 14% |
| Screen reader; VoiceOver (Apple) (n=5) | 80% | 0% | 20% |
| Speech recognition (Apple) (n=4) | 75% | 25% | 0% |
| Screen magnifier (Windows/Linux) (n=29) | 72% | 21% | 7% |
| Reading/text-to-speech tool (n=38) | 63% | 26% | 11% |
| Speech recognition (Windows) (n=23) | 43% | 35% | 22% |
n = number of respondents who rated satisfaction with that tool.
Darker shading indicates a higher percentage of respondents. Assistive tech types with fewer than four respondents are excluded. Neutral = neither satisfied nor dissatisfied. Positive = quite or very satisfied. Negative = dissatisfied or very dissatisfied.
Satisfaction with mobile phone and tablet assistive technology
| Mobile or tablet assistive technology | Positive % | Neutral % | Negative % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Screen reader; VoiceOver (Apple) (n=50) | 88 | 10 | 2 |
| Braille display (n=15) | 80 | 20 | 0 |
| Speech recognition (Apple) (n=24) | 79 | 8 | 12 |
| Reading/text-to-speech tool (n=42) | 60 | 38 | 2 |
| Speech recognition (Android) (n=13) | 69 | 23 | 8 |
| Screen magnifier (n=41) | 63 | 32 | 5 |
| Screen reader; TalkBack (Android) (n=16) | 62 | 25 | 12 |
| Mobile or tablet assistive technology | Positive % | Neutral % | Negative % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Screen reader; VoiceOver (Apple) (n=50) | 88% | 10% | 2% |
| Braille display (n=15) | 80% | 20% | 0% |
| Speech recognition (Apple) (n=24) | 79% | 8% | 12% |
| Reading/text-to-speech tool (n=42) | 60% | 38% | 2% |
| Speech recognition (Android) (n=13) | 69% | 23% | 8% |
| Screen magnifier (n=41) | 63% | 32% | 5% |
| Screen reader; TalkBack (Android) (n=16) | 62% | 25% | 12% |
n = number of respondents who rated satisfaction with that tool.
Darker shading indicates a higher percentage of respondents. Assistive tech types with fewer than four respondents are excluded. Neutral = neither satisfied nor dissatisfied. Positive = quite or very satisfied. Negative = dissatisfied or very dissatisfied.
The assistive tech tools themselves are working well, however websites and apps are letting people down.
Respondents were asked how often they hit issues online that make a task hard or impossible. Among desktop screen reader users (n=75), only one person said they never experience issues. Most (63%) have problems sometimes. Nearly one in five (19%) said issues happen most of the time.
| Frequency | Responses % |
|---|---|
| Sometimes | 63% |
| Often | 19% |
| Rarely | 15% |
| Always | 3% |
| Never | 1% |
n=75 desktop screen reader users.
The same pattern holds across other assistive tech types. 'Sometimes' is the most common response in nearly every group.
Respondents could describe up to three barriers they face when using their assistive tech online. Across all assistive tech types, including both desktop and mobile, we collected 757 usable responses. These were grouped into 24 themes.
The most important finding is that almost all the top barriers are about website and content design issues. They are not about the assistive tech tools themselves. People are not asking for better tools, they’re clearly asking for more accessible websites.
| Barrier | Responses % | Examples from respondents |
|---|---|---|
| Inaccessible or poorly coded web pages | 34% | "Badly coded websites", "Not WCAG compliant" |
| Pop-ups, overlays, and modals | 26% | "Cookie banners", "Overlays that trap focus" |
| Cognitive load, complexity, and time cost | 26% | "Too many steps", "Feeling drained and defeated" |
| Form accessibility | 23% | "Edit fields not working", "Complex form design" |
| Missing or poor labels | 22% | "Unlabelled buttons", "Missing alt text" |
| Images, graphics, and visual-only content | 19% | "Too many pictures", "Graphical web pages" |
| Keyboard and navigation accessibility | 14% | "Not keyboard accessible", "No focus indicator" |
| Magnification and zoom layout issues | 13% | "Constant panning", "Loss of context when zoomed" |
| Assistive tech software bugs and compatibility | 12% | "JAWS stops working", "App not compatible" |
| Heading and page structure | 11% | "No heading structure", "Poorly organised menus" |
| Other | 55% | - |
n=218 respondents. Barriers were coded from 42 open-text response fields, producing 757 coded responses in total. Respondents could report up to three barriers for each assistive technology they chose. Total exceeds 100%. Fourteen barriers with values below 10% are grouped under "other".
Two main themes have been identified. First, the impact of cognitive load. It’s more than just problems related to design and content. It includes the time it takes, the emotional strain, and the loss of confidence that builds up when people repeatedly face barriers. One respondent wrote that they choose companies based on how much time their website wastes. Another described feeling 'drained and defeated' when barriers don't go away.
The second main theme is pronunciation and language accuracy. Several respondents said speech recognition tools don't work well with Australian and New Zealand accents. One person specifically mentioned that Te Reo Māori words are mispronounced. This points to a gap in how these tools are trained for people in different countries and regions. It also provides an opportunity for more inclusive practices in the development of speech recognition tools.
AI tools and accessibility
This section looks at how people use artificial intelligence (AI) tools online. It covers who uses AI, what tools they use, and why some people have not yet adopted AI.
This is a high adoption rate and shows that AI is already part of the accessibility toolkit for many people in this survey.
Adoption is even higher among those who use assistive tech across both desktop and mobile, where 70% are also using AI. This suggests that people who use assistive tech more heavily are also more likely to have added AI to their toolkit.
| Option | Response % |
|---|---|
| Yes | 59% |
| No | 41% |
n=217 respondents.
Among AI users, general-purpose tools dominate. AI writing and image creation tools (for example, ChatGPT, Gemini, and Midjourney) are used by nearly three-quarters of AI users. These tools were not designed for accessibility, but people are finding ways to use them to meet their own access needs.
Tools built into existing assistive tech (such as AI features in JAWS or Dragon) are used by the fewest respondents (14%). This might reflect a lack of awareness that they exist in the software.
| AI tool type | Responses % | Examples |
|---|---|---|
| AI writing or image creation tools | 73% | ChatGPT, Gemini, Midjourney |
| AI voice assistants | 52% | Siri, Microsoft Copilot |
| Browser-based accessibility AI | 37% | Automatic alt text, AI summaries |
| Captioning or transcription tools | 26% | Live Captions, Otter.ai |
| AI features built into existing AT | 14% | JAWS AI features, Dragon AI |
n=125 respondents who specified which tools they use. *Respondents could select more than one type. Total exceeds 100%.*
Interestingly, AI adoption does not follow a simple age pattern. The highest rates are in the 45 to 54 group (70%) and the 55 to 64 group (66%). Younger respondents (18 to 34) adopt at 60%. The 35 to 44 and 65 and over groups are both at around 50%. It seems that access needs and digital confidence matter more than age.
| Age group | AI adoption rate % |
|---|---|
| 18 to 34 | 60% |
| 35 to 44 | 50% |
| 45 to 54 | 70% |
| 55 to 64 | 66% |
| 65 and over | 50% |
n=217 respondents.
Respondents with neurological disabilities have the highest AI adoption (73%). People with blindness come second (71%). The high rate among people in this survey who are blind is notable, as these respondents are also the most experienced assistive tech users in the survey. It suggests they are adding AI on top of a well-developed assistive tech toolkit.
| Disability type | AI adoption rate % |
|---|---|
| Neurological disability (n=15) | 73% |
| Blindness (n=73) | 71% |
| Deaf or hard of hearing (n=34) | 62% |
| Neurodivergent (n=60) | 57% |
| Mental health or psychosocial (n=30) | 57% |
| Low vision (n=36) | 44% |
| Physical disability (n=54) | 44% |
| Acquired Brain Injury (ABI) or stroke (n=12) | 42% |
n = the number of respondents in that group. Overall AI adoption rate: 58%. Respondents could select more than one disability.
The most common reason for participants not using AI was a preference for non-AI solutions. More than half of non-users (58%) actively chose not to use AI as a preference, rather than a barrier.
Privacy and security concerns were raised by 41% of non-users. For people who use assistive tech for essential services like banking and healthcare, these are real concerns. Any promotion of AI as an accessibility solution must consider data trust.
Nearly 30% of non-users said they simply don't know of any AI tools that support accessibility, highlighting a potential awareness gap.
| Reason for not using AI | Responses % |
|---|---|
| I prefer non-AI solutions | 58% |
| I am concerned about privacy or security | 41% |
| I don't know of any AI tools that support accessibility | 30% |
| I don't find them effective | 22% |
| I find AI tools difficult to use or navigate | 21% |
n=88 respondents. Respondents could select more than one reason. Total exceeds 100%.