Why users may choose not to upgrade assistive technology
Understand the personal and practical factors behind upgrade decisions.
What this helps you understand
Technology can support communication, access to information, travel, independence, employment, and community.
But keeping up with new assistive technology is not always simple. Disabled people may face barriers that affect whether they upgrade, delay an upgrade, or avoid changing tools.
Why this matters
Teams may assume that users always have the newest devices, operating systems, or assistive technology.
That assumption can lead to poor research planning and accessibility decisions. Many users continue using older tools because they work, because upgrades are expensive, or because change creates risk.
When to use this guidance
Use this guidance when you are:
- Planning accessibility research
- Deciding which assistive technology versions to test with
- Reviewing support needs for disabled users
- Interpreting feedback from users on older tools
- Thinking about accessibility across different device and software setups
Recommended approach
Do not treat outdated technology use as a lack of interest or skill.
A user’s decision may be shaped by cost, training access, geography, disability history, fear of change, and whether their current setup works reliably.
Best practices
Consider access to training and support
What to do:
Remember that not everyone can access high-quality assistive technology training.
Why it matters:
Training availability can vary by location, funding, and local services.
Example:
A person in a rural area may have fewer training options than someone in a city.
Consider cost
What to do:
Recognize that assistive technology can be expensive.
Why it matters:
Some people may need to pay for training, devices, software, or upgrades themselves.
Example:
A person may not be able to afford a new device, screen reader, Braille display, or software upgrade.
Consider fear of change
What to do:
Understand that a working setup can be valuable, even if it is not current.
Why it matters:
An upgrade can change gestures, commands, or app accessibility. It may also break a workflow the user depends on.
Example:
A user may keep an older setup because they know its commands, quirks, and workarounds.
Consider disability history
What to do:
Avoid assuming everyone adapts to assistive technology at the same pace.
Why it matters:
Someone who becomes disabled later in life may need to learn new daily living skills, mobility skills, and technology skills at the same time.
Example:
A person who loses sight as an adult may need more time and training to move from a mouse and monitor to keyboard commands and a screen reader.
Test with a range of setups
What to do:
Include users with different assistive technology versions and comfort levels when possible.
Why it matters:
Real-world users may not all be on the newest hardware, operating system, or assistive technology.
Example:
Research findings from only the latest setup may miss barriers that affect users on older tools.
Common mistakes to avoid
Avoid: Assuming everyone can upgrade when new technology is available.
Why: Cost, training, support, and risk can make upgrades difficult.
Do this instead: Ask about users’ current setups and constraints.
Avoid: Treating older technology as irrelevant.
Why: Many users continue using older tools in real life.
Do this instead: Consider whether your product supports a realistic range of setups.
Avoid: Assuming hesitation means resistance.
Why: Users may have good reasons to avoid an upgrade.
Do this instead: Listen for the practical barriers behind the decision.
Examples
Factors that can affect upgrade decisions include:
- Age
- Financial circumstances
- Geographic location
- Access to training
- Access to support
- Disability history
- Fear of change
- Risk of broken accessibility
- Comfort with an existing setup
What to do next
When planning accessibility research, ask participants what tools, devices, and versions they use. Use that context to understand their feedback and avoid assuming a single assistive technology setup.