Beyond Accessibility Compliance: Exploring the Role of Information on Apparel Shopping Websites for the Blind and Visually Impaired

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article adresses a relevant theme in the context of woldwide focus on accesibility for people with disabilities, proposing a study that could support more indepth research and reccomandations for website accesibility for visually impaired persons and also a motivational imbold while it emphasises the emotional impact of reduced accesibility.

The theoretical base is well founded (although the intro subthemes could be even shorter). 

The authors used a phenomenological research design to explore the visually impaired participants’ experiences of apparel shopping online, with a complex multidimentional methodology: task observations, a demographic, questionnaire, and in-depth interviews.

The conclusions and recommendations are well supported and invite to more awareness and specific measures regarding the shopping websites accesibility theme.

Author Response

Comments 1: The article adresses a relevant theme in the context of woldwide focus on accesibility for people with disabilities, proposing a study that could support more indepth research and reccomandations for website accesibility for visually impaired persons and also a motivational imbold while it emphasises the emotional impact of reduced accesibility.

Response 1: Thank you for highlighting the importance of this study.

Comments 2: The theoretical base is well founded (although the intro subthemes could be even shorter).

Response 2: Thank you for highlighting the strong theoretical base. At this time, we believe that shortening the subthemes would compromise the necessary background information for readers unfamiliar with this area.

Comments 3: The authors used a phenomenological research design to explore the visually impaired participants’ experiences of apparel shopping online, with a complex multidimentional methodology: task observations, a demographic, questionnaire, and in-depth interviews.

Response 3: Thank you for your support on our sound methodology.

Comments 4: The conclusions and recommendations are well supported and invite to more awareness and specific measures regarding the shopping websites accesibility theme.

Response 4:   Thank you for highlighting the strength of the conclusion and recommendations.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This is an interesting paper about digital accessibility in website design. In particular, it focusses on the experience of people with visual impairment of websites for apparel shopping. The core contribution of the paper is to demonstrate the usefulness of Culnan’s dimensions of accessibility approach, which was developed for offline contexts, for understanding experiences of website designs.

Much of the paper is valuable, but not all sections are equally well written. In particular, I feel that the paper gets better at it goes on, with the earlier sections the weakest and later sections much stronger. In particular, the paper needs to focus more on international contexts and scholarly literature when arguing the need for the paper.

I therefore suggest that the authors address the following comments:

 

• The Abstract could be strengthened by (a) setting the background in terms of international research, rather than national policy, and (b) explaining more directly what is the core contribution of the paper to research, rather than emphasising the implications for retailers.
• The Introduction would benefit from saying something about this paper and its core aims earlier. It seems to take a long time before we read anything other than background information about the broader issue, rather than the specific aims of this paper.
• The Introduction starts from a policy perspective. This is acceptable, but what is not acceptable is that all the policies referred to are USA national policies. This is an international journal for an international audience. Explain that the issue has resonance across the world. Quote policies from different governments, and also from international policy organisations where appropriate.
• The Introduction could also be strengthened by emphasising what this paper aims to contribute to academic research and what is novel about this contribution.
• Sections 1.1 and 1.2 do a good job of exploring particular papers. But they could be strengthened by giving a sense of how large and active are the areas of scholarship being reviewed. Are these active, high priority areas for other research scholars? A paragraph or so in each case would be useful.
• The theoretical framework section (1.3) would benefit from explaining Culnan’s dimensions more explicitly; perhaps by using bullet points and/or a diagram.
• Section 2.1 would benefit from a brief discussion of the implications of combining a phenomenological approach with an external framework (from Culnan). What are the implications of combining these approaches? How is Culnan’s framework actually used in what follows?
• Section 2.2 would benefit from having some short explanations interspersed into the various paragraphs about how Culnan’s framework was used, to keep the text consistent with the new explanation in section 2.1.
• The opening paragraphs of section 3 are really about data analysis. They should therefore be moved to section 2.2 in my view.
• Section 3 should start with some signposting information about what will be presented, in what order, and how this helps to address the objectives of the paper. The extent to which the theoretical framework will be visible throughout the section should be explained. The remainder of the section should try to make sure that the framework is visible to remain consistent with the new explanation.

Author Response

Comments 1: This is an interesting paper about digital accessibility in website design. In particular, it focusses on the experience of people with visual impairment of websites for apparel shopping. The core contribution of the paper is to demonstrate the usefulness of Culnan’s dimensions of accessibility approach, which was developed for offline contexts, for understanding experiences of website designs.

Much of the paper is valuable, but not all sections are equally well written. In particular, I feel that the paper gets better at it goes on, with the earlier sections the weakest and later sections much stronger. In particular, the paper needs to focus more on international contexts and scholarly literature when arguing the need for the paper.

Response 1: Thank for your insightful feedback and recognition of the paper's contribution regarding Culnan's dimensions of accessibility. We appreciate the observation that the paper's strength increases in the later sections. We agree that the introduction can be strengthened by incorporating a broader range of international contexts. We will revise these sections to address this important point and ensure a consistently high quality throughout the manuscript. See the following comments for changes made.

Comments 2: The Abstract could be strengthened by (a) setting the background in terms of international research, rather than national policy, and (b) explaining more directly what is the core contribution of the paper to research, rather than emphasising the implications for retailers.

Response 2: Thank you for pointing out the need to (a) set the background in terms of international research. We shifted from solely referencing US national policy to incorporating international research and statistics that highlight the global challenges of online apparel shopping accessibility for PVI. This will provide a more globally relevant and impactful introduction to the problem. See page 1, paragraph 1, lines 8-11. Updated text in the manuscript. Added new citation to reference page.

And, (b) emphasizing the core research contribution. We agree that the abstract should primarily highlight the scholarly novelty of our work. We reframed our contribution statement to more directly articulate the specific gap in existing research our study addresses and the key theoretical contributions we are making to the field. See page 1, paragraph 1, lines 20-23. Updated text in the manuscript.

Comments 3: The Introduction would benefit from saying something about this paper and its core aims earlier. It seems to take a long time before we read anything other than background information about the broader issue, rather than the specific aims of this paper.

Response 3:  Thank you for pointing out the need to address the paper’s core aims earlier. We addressed this on page 1, paragraph 2, lines 41 -42 and page 2, paragraph 1, lines 85-88. Updated text in manuscript.

Comments 4: The Introduction starts from a policy perspective. This is acceptable, but what is not acceptable is that all the policies referred to are USA national policies. This is an international journal for an international audience. Explain that the issue has resonance across the world. Quote policies from different governments, and also from international policy organisations where appropriate.

Response 4: Thank you for pointing out the need to prioritize the international context. We agree. This change has been made on the following

• page 1, paragraph2, lines 31-33.
• page 1, paragraph 2, line 41-42.
• Page 2, paragraph 1, lines 93-96.
• Page 2, paragraph 2, line 98
• Page 2, paragraph 3, lines 113-120
• Page 3, paragraph, 1, line 209
• Page 14, paragraph 1, line 746, 778, 781
• Page 14, paragraph 3, line 772

Updated text in manuscript.

Comments 5: The Introduction could also be strengthened by emphasising what this paper aims to contribute to academic research and what is novel about this contribution.

Response 5: Thank you for pointing out the need to strengthen the introduction by emphasizing the contributions to academic research. This change has been made on page 6, paragraph 2, lines 357-360. Updated text in manuscript. 

Comments 6: Sections 1.1 and 1.2 do a good job of exploring particular papers. But they could be strengthened by giving a sense of how large and active are the areas of scholarship being reviewed. Are these active, high priority areas for other research scholars? A paragraph or so in each case would be useful.

Response 6: Thank you for your support on sections 1.1 and 1.2. After a thorough systematic literature review by searching three academic databases: Scopus, Google Scholar, and Web of Science with the keywords “apparel shopping with the visually impaired” and ”clothing shopping for the blind”. The search resulted in 18 articles relevant to the study population (PVI) since 2025. There are few studies which explore the exact context of this study (PVI and shopping online for apparel), but these articles offer insight into the barriers this population may face when shopping for apparel either in-person or online—resulting in a new, high priority area for the primary professional organization of research scholars in textile and apparel industry.

Comments 7: The theoretical framework section (1.3) would benefit from explaining Culnan’s dimensions more explicitly; perhaps by using bullet points and/or a diagram.

Response 7: Thank you for your suggestion on explaining the dimensions more explicitly. This change has been made on page 5, paragraph 2, lines 322-326. Updated text and tables in manuscript.

Comments 8: Section 2.1 would benefit from a brief discussion of the implications of combining a phenomenological approach with an external framework (from Culnan). What are the implications of combining these approaches? How is Culnan’s framework actually used in what follows?

Response 8: Thank you for your suggestion on the need to clarify the methodological tension. We agree and have added a paragraph to explain the implications for combining these approaches and how the framework is used in what follows. This change has been made on page 6, paragraph 4, lines 376-389 and page 7, paragraph 1, lines 398-400.

Comments 9: Section 2.2 would benefit from having some short explanations interspersed into the various paragraphs about how Culnan’s framework was used, to keep the text consistent with the new explanation in section 2.1.

Response 9: Thank you for your suggestion. This change has been made on page 7, paragraph 4, lines 435-438 and lines 442-444.

Comments 10: The opening paragraphs of section 3 are really about data analysis. They should therefore be moved to section 2.2 in my view.

Response 10: Thank you for your suggestion on moving the data analysis portion to the methods section. This change has been made on page 8, paragraph 1, lines 459-469.

Comments 11: Section 3 should start with some signposting information about what will be presented, in what order, and how this helps to address the objectives of the paper. The extent to which the theoretical framework will be visible throughout the section should be explained. The remainder of the section should try to make sure that the framework is visible to remain consistent with the new explanation.

Response 11: Thank you for your suggestion about explicitly stating how the results will be presented to address the objectives and how the theoretical framework is connected. This change has been made on page 8, paragraph 2, lines 477-481.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors, please, read carefully and try to address all my remarks and notes.

1. In the end of the Introduction, try to include a brief description of the remainder of the paper, for example: Section 2 describes …, In Section 3 is presented …
2. Try to avoid, if possible, citation of references in the abstract. Instead of this, try to briefly express the main ideas in the cited references.
3. Try to include the keyword “inclusive design” in the main text of the paper.
4. Try to cite references [1] and [2] in the Introduction.
5. In Fig. 1, try to increase, if possible, the font size of the text in the central three circles, to be more readable.
6. For references [8] and [33], try to add ISBN, if required according to the Journal template.
7. For reference [18], try to add doi or isbn or issn.
8. A minor English grammar and spell check is required.

Author Response

Comments 1: In the end of the Introduction, try to include a brief description of the remainder of the paper, for example: Section 2 describes …, In Section 3 is presented …

Response 1: Thank you for highlighting the need to include a brief description of the remainder of the paper in the introduction. We have addressed this on page 6, paragraph 2, lines 357-360. Updated text in manuscript.

Comments 2: Try to avoid, if possible, citation of references in the abstract. Instead of this, try to briefly express the main ideas in the cited references.

Response 2: Thank you for this suggestion. In order to address Reviewer 2’s suggestion to prioritize an international context, we have addressed this for reference [1] by interchanging the reference with an international statistic on page 1, paragraph 2, lines 31-33 along with its reference at the end on the manuscript on page 16, lines 836-837.

Updated text in manuscript.

Comments 3: Try to include the keyword “inclusive design” in the main text of the paper.

Response 3:  Thank you for this suggestion. We have included this keyword as follows:

• Page 1, paragraph 1, line 20-23
• Page 2, paragraph 1, line 68-70

Comments 4: Try to cite references [1] and [2] in the Introduction.

Response 4: Thank you for this suggestion. We have addressed this for the new international contextual reference [1] on page 1, paragraph 2, lines 31-33 and new reference [4] on page 1, paragraph 2, lines 41-22 and page 2, paragraph 1, lines 93-96. Updated text in manuscript.

Comments 5: In Fig. 1, try to increase, if possible, the font size of the text in the central three circles, to be more readable.

Response 5: Thank you for this suggestion. We have addressed this on page 9, paragraph 1, lines 515-516. Updated Figure 1 in manuscript.

Comments 6: For references [8] and [33], try to add ISBN, if required according to the Journal template.

Response 6: Thank you for this suggestion. We have addressed this for the previous reference number [8] which is now number [7] with new citations added and can be found on page 16, line 848-849 and reference [33] on page 17, line 919-920. Updated text in manuscript.

Comments 7: For reference [18], try to add doi or isbn or issn.

Response 7: Thank you for this suggestion. We have addressed this on page 16, lines 873-875. Updated text in manuscript.

Comments 8: A minor English grammar and spell check is required.

Response 8: Thank you for this suggestion. We have addressed this by completing a full spelling and grammar spell check after all revisions were completed.