>From the file in portable document format
http://dsc.ucsf.edu/UCSF/pdf/REPORT13.pdf

Computer and Internet Use Among People with Disabilities   
  
by H . Stephen Kaye, Ph. D. Disability Statistics Center Institute for Health
and Aging   
  
U n i versity of Califo rn i a San Fra n c i s c o, Califo rn i a   
  
March, 2000 National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research   
  
U. S. D e p a rtment of Education   
  
Disability Statistics Report 13 ii   
  
Acknowledgments   
  
The author is grateful to the following individuals for their contributions to
this report: Mitch LaPlante, for guidance on the analysis methods; Jack McNeil
and Alexandra Enders, for helpful feedback; David K e e r, project off i c e r,
and the staff of NIDRR; and Will Leber, graphic designer.   
  
Disclaimer   
  
This report was prepared under ED Grant #H133B980045. The views expressed
herein are those of the participants. No official endorsement by the U. S.
Department of Education is intended or should be inferred.   
  
Availability   
  
Individuals with disabilities may obtain this document in an alternate format
(for example: Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer diskette) on
request.   
  
Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the
Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1- 800- 877- 8339 between 8 a. m.
and 8 p. m., Eastern time, Monday through Friday.   
  
To obtain additional printed copies of this publication, please contact the
Disability Statistics Center or N I D R R :   
  
Disability Statistics Center University of California, San Francisco Box 0646,
Laurel Heights 3333 California Street San Francisco, CA 94143- 0646 http://
www. dsc. ucsf. edu E- mail: distats@ itsa. ucsf. edu (415) 502- 5210   
  
Suggested Citation   
  
Kaye, H. S. (2000). Computer and Internet Use Among People with Disabilities.
Disability Statistics Report (13). Washington DC: U. S. Department of
Education, National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research.   
  
David Keer U. S. Department of Education OSERS/ NIDRR Switzer Building, Room
3431 Washington, D. C. 20202 h t t p : / / w w w. e d . g o v / o ff i c e s /
O S E R S / N I D R R E- mail: david_ keer@ ed. gov (202) 205- 5633   
  
Computer and Internet Use Among People With Disabilities iii   
  
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1   
  
DATASOURCE AND METHODS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3   
  
ANALYSIS RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5 Age and Gender . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . .5 Employment Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8 Educational Attainment . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.8 Family Income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8 Race and Ethnicity . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.10 Reasons for Internet Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11   
  
CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13   
  
REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13   
  
CONTENTS   
  
Disability Statistics Report 13 iv   
  
Computer and Internet Use Among People With Disabilities 1   
  
Computer technology and the Internet have a t remendous potential to broaden
the lives and i n c rease the independence of people with disabilities. Those
who have difficulty leaving their homes can now log in and order groceries,
shop for appliances, re s e a rch health questions, participate in online
discussions, catch up with friends, or make new ones. Blind people, who used to
wait months or years for the information they needed to be made available in
Braille or on audiotape, can now access the very same news stories, magazine
articles, government reports, and information on consumer p roducts at the very
same time it becomes available to the sighted population. People who have diff
iculty holding a pen or using a keyboard can use the latest speech recognition
software to write letters, pay their bills, or perform work- related tasks.   
  
These new technologies hold great pro m i s e , but as this report makes
abundantly clear, the   
  
computer revolution has left the vast majority of people with disabilities
behind. Only one- quarter of people with disabilities own computers, and only
one- tenth ever make use of the Internet. Elderly people with disabilities, and
those with low incomes or low educational attainment, are even less likely to
take advantage of these new technologies. African Americans with disabilities
also have an especially low rate of computer and Internet use.   
  
Extensive media coverage was devoted to a recent analysis (National
Telecommunications and Information Administration, 1999) documenting huge
racial and ethnic gaps in access to electro n i c technologies in the United
States. The pre s e n t report, using data from the same survey, demonstrates
that gaps in computer and Internet use based on disability status are just as
large as those based on race and ethnicity.   
  
INTRODUCTION   
  
Disability Statistics Report 13 2   
  
Computer and Internet Use Among People With Disabilities 3   
  
The Current Population Survey (CPS) is a nationally re p resentative survey of
appro x i m a t e l y 50,000 U. S. households each month. Conducted by the
Census Bureau for the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the basic CPS questionnaire
focuses on employment status and household income. The sample consists of eight
panels, with a new panel b rought into rotation every month. Households in each
panel are interviewed eight times for four months in a ro w, and then, after an
eight- month b reak, during the same four calendar months of the following
year.   
  
Supplementary questionnaires are often included along with the basic monthly
survey. The pre s e n t analysis is based on data from two such supplements:
the 1998 Computer and Internet Use Supplement, conducted in December of that
year, and the 1999 Annual Demographic Survey, conducted three months later, in
Marc h .   
  
The Computer and Internet Use Supplement contained questions on household
computer ownership and Internet access, as well as questions on specific uses
of the Internet by each household member. It was conducted for the National
Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) as a means of
surveying the degree of penetration of computer technology in the general
population. NTIAs analysis found significant gaps in access to computers and
the Internet, based on factors such as family income, race and ethnicity, and
educational attainment.   
  
Disability is not mentioned in NTIAs re p o r t , because the supplement was
not designed to meas u re computer and Internet use among people with
disabilities. No questions on disability status were asked in the supplement,
nor does the basic monthly survey provide any useful way of identifying a
general sample of the population with disabilities. 1   
  
Unlike the monthly survey, however, the Marc h demographic supplement does
include a single,   
  
b road question on work disability. Respondents are asked whether anyone in the
household has a health problem or disability which prevents them f rom working
or which limits the kind or amount of work they can do. The question provides a
re a s o nable way of identifying a sample of persons at least 15 years of age
who are limited in their ability to work. Work disability is a narrower and
more pro blematic definition of disability than activity limitation or
functional limitation; it is also of somewhat dubious validity for people
without work histories, and for those elderly people who re t i red from work
long ago.   
  
Because of the longitudinal nature of the CPS, it is possible to link data from
the two above- mentioned supplemental surveys. Of the eight panels interviewed
in December 1998, two were re - i n t e rviewed the following Marc h . 2 Thus,
for one- quarter of the sample, minus missing responses, it is possible to
obtain the work disability status of those persons whose computer and Internet
usage was separately measured.   
  
The two panels for which both surveys w e re administered number 30,128 re c o
rds, out of a total of 122,935 re c o rds for the entire Computer/ Internet
supplement. In 91.6 percent of these cases it is possible to merge data from
the two supplements; the remaining 8.4 percent (2522 re c o rds) have been
dropped for lack of work disability data. Simple non- response is one reason
for missing data. Another is that the CPS is a survey of households rather than
of families, and no attempt is made to recontact families who moved between
interviews. The new residents of the household are interviewed instead, which
leaves us with no information on the disability status of the persons of intere
s t .   
  
The merged sample used in this analysis numbers 27,606 re c o rds, or 22.5
percent of the full Computer/ Internet Supplement sample. Some 2,196 re c o rds
re p resent persons identified as having work disabilities. The reduced sample
lacks the statistical power for a highly detailed analysis of the computer and
Internet use habits of people with disabilities, but it is adequate to provide
comparisons of computer ownership and Internet use among broad sub- populations
with and without work disabilities.   
  
For the purposes of evaluating computer and   
  
DATA SOURCE AND METHODS   
  
1 It would be possible, however, to use the monthly survey to analyze the
population unable to work because of health, but this is an overly restrictive
definition of disability.   
  
2 It is fortuitous that the survey was conducted in December, so that there was
a partial overlap with the March demographic supplement. The previous
supplement on computer and Internet use, conducted in October 1997, had no
panels that overlapped with March 1997 or 1998.   
  
Disability Statistics Report 13 4   
  
probability of a family changing residence during the three- month lag between
interviews is also likely to vary with these characteristics. In order to
reduce biases due to missing data (as well as to account for the missing
panels), individual records in the merged sample have been re- weighted so as
to obtain the same population estimate as the full sample in 60 age- sex- race
cells (15 age bins, 2 sexes, and 2 races black vs. other).   
  
In the analysis of households, the re- weighting (based on the original
household weight) uses the age, sex, and race of the first respondent listed in
the survey roster. For this analysis, 40 age- sex- race cells are used for
post- stratification, with the number of age bins reduced to 10 so that the few
households headed by persons under 20 years of age are all relegated to a
single age bin.   
  
Because the estimates in this report are based on a sample of the population,
they are subject to sampling error. Estimates of sampling errors have been
calculated using formulas provided by the B u reau of the Census (Bureau of the
Census, 1999). 3 In the data tables, estimates with low statistical reliability
(standard error greater than 30 percent of the estimate) are flagged with an
asterisk. All comparisons mentioned in the text have been tested for
statistical significance, and, unless otherwise stated, are significant at the
95 percent confidence level or greater (p<. 05). Internet use among various
racial and ethnic   
  
groups, this report imitates the NTIA study in using the household as the unit
of analysis. The households racial and ethnic classification is that of the
first respondent listed in the survey roster generally the person in whose name
the home is owned or rented. Unlike the NTIA analysis, however, this report
preserves the surveys distinction between the racial classification and the
identification of Hispanic origin. In other words, a householder identifying
herself as black (in response to the question about race) and of Hispanic
origin (in response to a separate question on ethnicity) would have her
household listed under the racial category African American as well as the
ethnic category Hispanic.   
  
For some 21.8 percent of h o u s e h o l d s , or 10,480 of the 48,070
households interviewed in the Computer and Internet Supplement, the Demographic
Supplement contains re c o rds for all household members. Only these
households, for which complete work disability information is available, have
been retained in this analysis.   
  
Survey non- response has been observed to vary with age, sex, and racial
background. The   
  
3 The stratum and primary sampling unit data necessary for direct estimation of
standard errors are not provided in the CPS public use data files.   
  
Computer and Internet Use Among People With Disabilities 5   
  
Of the 20.9 million Americans aged 15 and over with work disabilities (see
above for definition), 5.0 million have computers at home (Table A). Less than
half of this group, 2.4 million people, have access to the Internet via their
home computer, whether or not they choose to take advantage of it. Some 1.5
million actually use the Internet at home; 2.1 million people with disabilities
make use of the Internet either at home or on some other computer.   
  
As shown in Figure 1, people with disabilities a re less than half as likely as
their non- disabled counterparts to have access to a computer at home (23.9 vs.
51.7 percent). The gap in Internet access is even more striking: Almost three
times as many people without disabilities have the ability to connect to the
Internet at home as those with disabilities 31.1 versus 11.4 perc e n t .   
  
Whether through a home computer or one at work, at school, or in a library,
people with disabil ities are far less likely than those without disabilities  

  
to make use of the Internet. Only one- tenth (9.9 percent) of people with
disabilities connect to the Internet, compared to almost four- tenths (38.1
percent) of those without disabilities. When they do use the Internet, it is
likely to be done at home (7.2 p e rcent use the Internet at home, compared to
25.9 p e rcent of those without disabilities). Internet use away from home is
much less common for those with disabilities, in part because most people with
work disabilities are not employed: Only 3.9 percent of those with disabilities
use the Internet outside of the home, compared to 20.6 percent of their non-
disabled counterparts.   
  
Age and Gender   
  
Although the disability population is heavily skewed toward the older ages, and
older people   
  
ANALYSIS RESULTS   
  
Persons aged 15 and above 20,877 100.0 189,954 100.0 Has computer in household
4,983 23.9  98,267 51.7 Has Internet access at home 2,379 11.4  59,132 31.1
Uses Internet 2,076 9.9  72,300 38.1   
  
at home 1,512 7.2  49,126 25.9 elsewhere 821 3.9  39,050 20.6   
  
Persons aged 15 64 12,579 100.0 164,928 100.0 Has computer 4,106 32.6  91,618
55.6 Has Internet access at home 1,991 15.8  55,903 33.9 Uses Internet 1,896
15.1  69,702 42.3   
  
Persons aged 65 and above 8,289 100.0 23,973 100.0 Has computer 877 10.6  6,056
25.3 Has Internet access at home 388 4.7  2,944 12.3 Uses Internet 180 * 2.2 * 
2,134 8.9   
  
Table A. Computer ownership and Internet use, by disability status and age
group, ages 15 and over.   
  
Source: Current Population Survey, 1998 Computer and Internet Use Supplement
and 1999 Annual Demographic Supplement   
  
Difference in rates between populations with and without work disability is
statistically significant at the 95% confidence level or better.   
  
*Estimate has low statistical reliability (standard error exceeds 30 percent of
estimate).   
  
Work disability No disability   
  
Number (1000s) % Number   
  
(1000s) %   
  
Disability Statistics Report 13 6   
  
are less likely to use new technologies, the abovementioned gaps are not
accounted for by differences in age. As Figure 2 shows, significant diff
erences remain in rates of computer ownership, Internet access, and Internet
use for both the non- elderly (ages 15 64) and elderly (65 and above)
populations.   
  
Only one- third (32.6 percent) of non- elderly persons with work disabilities
have computers in their homes, comp ared to more than half (55.6 percent) of
those without disabilities. Once again, only about half of those computer-
owners with disabilities can access the Internet 15.8 percent of the disability
population, compared to 33.9 percent of the non- disabled. And the ratio of
Internet use is nearly 3 to 1: 42.3 percent of people without disabilities use
the Internet, compared to only 15.1 percent of those with disabilities.   
  
Among the elderly, only one- quarter (25.3 percent) of those without
disabilities have computers, but a still smaller fraction only one- tenth, or
10.6 percent of those with disabilities have them. Internet access is available
for about half of computer owners in each group (12.3 percent of non disabled
and 4.7 percent of those with disabilities).   
  
Although actual use of the Internet is rare among the elderly, it is far higher
for those without disabilities (8.9 percent) than for those with (2.2 perce
nt).   
  
For the population as a whole, the gender gap in computer ownership and
Internet use is statistically significant but surprisingly small. Just over
half (51.6 percent) of men and just under half (48.7 percent) of women have
access to a computer at home; one- third (33.3 percent) of men and just under a
third (30.5 percent) of women use the Internet. Among the population with work
disabilities, there are no statistically significant gender gaps (Table B). The
gaps between those with   
  
Figure 1. Computer ownership and Internet use, by disability status.   
  
0 10   
  
20 30   
  
40 50   
  
60   
  
Work disability 23.9 11.4 9.9 No disability 51.7 31.1 38.1   
  
Has computer in household Has Internet access   
  
at home Uses Internet   
  
Figure 2. Computer ownership and Internet use, by age group and disability
status.   
  
0 10   
  
20 30   
  
40 50   
  
60   
  
Work disability 32.6 15.8 15.1 10.6 4.7 2.2 No disability 55.6 33.9 42.3 25.3
12.3 8.9   
  
Has computer Has Internet access at home Uses Internet Has computer Has
Internet   
  
access at home Uses Internet   
  
NON- ELDERLY ELDERLY   
  
No disability No disability   
  
Computer and Internet Use Among People With Disabilities 7   
  
Gender   
  
Male 9,587 2,383 24.9  1,056 11.0  92,105 49,040 53.2 36,942 40.1 Female 11,289
2,600 23.0  1,020 9.0  97,849 49,227 50.3 35,358 36.1   
  
Employment status (ages 18 64 only)   
  
Employed 3,351 1,427 42.6  885 26.4  124,001 70,547 56.9 54,621 44.0 Not
employed 9,024 2,608 28.9  970 10.8  29,445 13,786 46.8 8,914 30.3   
  
Educational attainment   
  
Not high school grad 7,461 949 12.7  179 * 2.4 *  37,520 12,949 34.5 8,457 22.5
High school grad 11,418 3,105 27.2  1,294 11.3  108,779 53,267 49.0 35,957 33.1
College grad 1,998 929 46.5  604 30.2  43,655 32,051 73.4 27,885 63.9   
  
Family income   
  
Less than $20,000 8,614 950 11.0  424 4.9  28,557 6,326 22.2 5,419 19.0 $20,000
or more 8,512 3,403 40.0  1,417 16.6  132,451 81,042 61.2 59,916 45.2   
  
Difference in rates between households with and without work disability is
statistically significant at the 95% confidence level or better. *Estimate has
low statistical reliability (standard error exceeds 30 percent of estimate).   
  
Uses Internet Number   
  
(1000s) %   
  
No work disability   
  
% % Total   
  
population Total population Computer in   
  
household Computer in household Number   
  
(1000s) Number (1000s)   
  
Table B. Computer ownership and Internet use, by disability status, gender,
employment status, educational attainment, and family income, ages 15 and over. 
 
  
Source: Current Population Survey, 1998 Computer and Internet Use Supplement
and 1999 Annual Demographic Supplement. Uses Internet   
  
Number (1000s) %   
  
With work disability   
  
Number (1000s) Number   
  
(1000s)   
  
Figure 3. Computer and Internet use, by disability and employment status, ages
18 64.   
  
0 10   
  
20 30   
  
40 50   
  
60 70   
  
80   
  
Work disability 42.6 28.9 26.4 10.8 No disability 56.9 46.8 44.0 30.3   
  
Employed Not employed Employed Not employed   
  
HAS COMPUTER USES INTERNET   
  
No disability   
  
Figure 4. Computer and Internet use, by disability status and educational
attainment, ages 15 and over.   
  
0 10   
  
20 30   
  
40 50   
  
60 70   
  
80   
  
Work disability 12.7 27.2 46.5 2.4 11.3 30.2 No disability 34.5 49.0 73.4 22.5
33.1 63.9   
  
Not high school grad High school   
  
grad College grad Not high school grad High school   
  
grad College grad   
  
HAS COMPUTER USES INTERNET   
  
Disability Statistics Report 13 8   
  
and without disabilities remain large and significant for both sexes, however.
For example, 24.9 p e rcent of men with disabilities own computers, c o m p a
red to 53.2 percent without; 23.0 percent of women with disabilities own
computers, versus 50.3 percent without.   
  
Employment Status   
  
For working- age adults, having a job can make it financially feasible to buy a
computer; often, on- the- job access to computers and the Internet is also
provided, along with training in how to use them. It is not surprising, there f
o re, that people with and without work disabilities are more likely to have
computers and use the Internet if they are employed than if they are not
(Figure 3 and Table B).   
  
But even when they do have jobs, people with disabilities are significantly
less likely to gain access to these new technologies: A m o n g employed people
with work disabilities, 42.6 percent have computers and 26.4 percent use the
Internet, compared to 56.9 and 44.0 percent of their non- disabled
counterparts. All around, rates are significantly lower among those without
jobs: Only three- tenths (28.9 percent) of those with disabilities have
computers, and only about one- tenth (10.8 percent) use the Internet.   
  
Educational Attainment   
  
People who are well educated are far more like ly to have the skills, not to
mention the financial   
  
re s o u rces, necessary to buy and use computer techn o l o g y. But re g a
rdless of the level of educational attainment, people with disabilities have
much lower rates of computer ownership and Internet use than their non-
disabled peers (Figure 4).   
  
Only one- eighth (12.7 percent) of people with disabilities who have not
graduated from high school own computers. This figure compares with o n e - t h
i rd (34.5 percent) of non- high- school- graduates without disabilities,
almost half (46.5 perc e n t ) of college graduates w i t h disabilities, and
thre e quarters (73.4 percent) of college graduates without d i s a b i l i t i
e s .   
  
Even more striking is the fact that only 2.4 percent of people with
disabilities who lack high school diplomas use the Internet. Those without
disabilities are almost 10 times as likely to connect (22.5 percent), and those
with disabilities who have college degrees are still more likely (30.2 perc e n
t ) . But even this last group has less than half the likelihood of Internet
use as college graduates without disabilities, almost two- thirds (63.9
percent) of whom are Internet users.   
  
Family Income   
  
Half (50.3 percent) of people with work disabilities have family incomes of
under $20,000 per y e a r. For this group, buying a computer and paying the
monthly fees of an Internet service p rovider may seem like a frivolous expense
in relation to the basic necessities of life. Low- income   
  
No disability   
  
Computer and Internet Use Among People With Disabilities 9   
  
All households 17,709 4,298 24.3  2,144 12.1  86,503 41,179 47.6 24,772 28.6   
  
Race   
  
White 14,297 3,833 26.8  1,905 13.3  73,133 36,693 50.2 22,454 30.7 African
American 2,910 311 10.7   141 4.8   9,879 2,602 26.3  1,130 11.4  Native
American 208 43 * 20.7 * 41 * 19.5 * 583 228 39.1 143 24.6 Asian/ Pacific Isl.
294 111 37.8  58 * 19.7 *  2,909 1,656 56.9  1,045 35.9   
  
Ethnicity   
  
Hispanic 1,257 239 19.0  106 * 8.5 * 6,986 2,282 32.7  1,018 14.6  Non-
Hispanic 16,452 4,059 24.7  2,038 12.4  79,517 38,897 48.9 23,755 29.9   
  
* Estimate has low statistical reliability (standard error exceeds 30 percent
of estimate).   
  
With work disability No work disability   
  
Total households   
  
Number (1000s) Number   
  
(1000s) % Number (1000s) %   
  
Computer in household Household has   
  
Internet access  Rate is significantly different from that of whites (for
racial groups) or non- Hispanics (for Hispanics) at the 95% confidence level or
better.   
  
% Household has   
  
Internet access   
  
Table C. Household computer and Internet access, by race, ethnicity, and
disability status of household members.   
  
 Difference in rates between households with and without work disability is
statistically significant at the 95% confidence level or better. Source:
Current Population Survey, 1998 Computer and Internet Use Supplement and 1999
Annual Demographic Supplement   
  
Note: A household is classified as having a work disability if any member has a
work disability. Race and ethnicity are those of the first person listed in the
survey roster, generally the person in whose name the home is owned or rented.
Households of Hispanic ethnicity are also included in the appropriate racial
categories.   
  
Total households   
  
Number (1000s) Number   
  
(1000s) % Computer in   
  
household Number   
  
(1000s)   
  
Figure 5. Computer and Internet use, by disability status and family income,
ages 15 and over.   
  
0 10   
  
20 30   
  
40 50   
  
60 70   
  
80   
  
Work disability 11.0 40.0 4.9 16.6 No disability 22.2 61.2 19.0 45.2   
  
Less than $20,000 $20,000 or more Less than   
  
$20,000 $20,000 or more   
  
HAS COMPUTER USES INTERNET   
  
No disability   
  
Disability Statistics Report 13 10   
  
people with and without disabilities own computers and use the Internet at
rates much lower than those of their more financially comfortable counterparts
(Figure 5).   
  
In both income categories, people with disabilities are significantly less
likely to own computers: half as likely for the low- income group (11.0 percent
vs. 22.2 percent), and two- thirds as likely for the higher- income group (40.0
vs. 61.2 perc e n t ) . Use of the Internet is one- quarter as likely among the
low- income group (4.9 percent for those with disabilities vs. 19.0 percent for
those without) and just over one- third as likely for the higher- i n c o m e g
roup (16.6 percent vs. 45.2 perc e n t ) .   
  
Race and Ethnicity   
  
Table C and Figure 6 present statistics on h o u s e h o l d computer ownership
and Internet access, broken down into racial and ethnic categories (see Data S
o u rce and Methods for details on racial and ethnic classification).
Households are classified as having work disabilities if one or more members of
the household have a work disability.   
  
Within each racial and ethnic group, the rate of computer ownership is much
lower when there is a disability present in the household than when there is
not. 4 Among white households, those with disabilities are about half as likely
to own computers as are those without (26.8 vs. 50.2 percent). Among   
  
African American households, only one- tenth (10.7 percent) of those with
disabilities have computers, compared to one- quarter (26.3 percent) of
households having no members with disabilities. Some 37.8 percent of Asian and
Pacific Islander households with disabilities have computers, compared to 56.9
percent of those without disabilities. And among Hispanic households, 19.0
percent of those with disabilities have computers, versus 32.7 percent of those
with no disability.   
  
T h e re are also large gaps in Internet access within the racial categories. 5
A c ross the board , households having members with work disabilities a re
roughly half as likely to be connected to the Internet as those without
disabled members (for white households, 13.3 vs. 30.7 percent; for black
households, 4.8 vs. 11.4 percent; for A s i a n / P a c i f i c Islander
households, 19.7 vs. 35.9 perc e n t ) .   
  
Among those households having members with work disabilities, most of the diff
e rences in rates between racial and ethnic groups are not statistically
significant. But one set of diff e rences is significant, and it bears pointing
out: A m o n g households with work disabilities, A f r i c a n   
  
Figure 6. Household computer ownership and Internet access, by race/ ethnicity
and disability status of household members.   
  
0 10   
  
20 30   
  
40 50   
  
60   
  
Work disability 26.8 10.7 37.8 19.0 13.3 4.8 19.7 8.5 No work disability 50.2
26.3 56.9 32.7 30.7 11.4 35.9 14.6   
  
White African American   
  
Asian/ Pacific Islander Hispanic White African   
  
American Asian/   
  
Pacific Islander Hispanic   
  
HAS COMPUTER HAS INTERNET ACCESS   
  
4 For Native Americans, the gaps in computer ownership and Internet access are
not statistically significant and have not been shown in Figure 6.   
  
5 Among people of Hispanic origin, the difference in Internet access rates is
not statistically significant.   
  
No work disability   
  
Computer and Internet Use Among People With Disabilities 11   
  
American households are much less likely than white households to have a
computer (10.7 vs. 26.8 p e rcent) or have access to the Internet (4.8 vs. 13.3
p e rc e n t ) .   
  
It is also worth noting that the rates for white households with disabilities
(26.8 percent of which have computers and 13.3 percent of which have access to
the Internet) are roughly equal to those of African American households without
disabilities (26.3 and 11.4 percent, respectively). Thus, in comparing these
populations, disability and race can be seen to be equally significant factors
in determining the households likelihood of exposure to computer technology.   
  
Reasons for Internet Use   
  
By far the most common reasons that people with disabilities cite for using the
Internet are send ing and receiving electronic mail (1.4 million people,   
  
or 67.1 percent of the 2.1 million Internet users) and searching for
information (1.3 million, or 62.8 percent; see Table D). These are also the two
topranked reasons for Internet use among people without disabilities.   
  
F o u r- tenths (39.0 percent) of Internet users with disabilities read the
news online, check the weather forecast, or obtain sports scores. Threetenths
(29.3 percent) take courses over the Internet or use online resources to help
with schoolwork. One- quarter (26.2 percent) of Internet users with
disabilities use the Internet for job- related tasks, a significantly lower
figure than the 43.1 percent of Internet users without disabilities, who are
more likely to have jobs. One- sixth (17.0 percent) use the Internet for
shopping, paying bills, or other commercial activities, and 15.9 percent use it
to look for employment opportunities.   
  
All Internet users 2,076 100.0 72,300 100.0 Electronic mail 1,393 67.1 54,335
75.2 Search for info. 1,304 62.8 46,466 64.3 News, weather, sports 810 39.0
32,529 45.0 Courses, schoolwork 608 29.3 25,456 35.2 Job- related tasks 543
26.2 31,182 43.1 Shop, pay bills, etc. 353 17.0 16,255 22.5 Search for jobs 330
15.9 12,066 16.7 Other 498 24.0 13,075 18.1   
  
Table D. Reasons for using the Internet, by disability status, ages 15 and
over.   
  
Source: Current Population Survey, 1998 Computer and Internet Use Supplement
and 1999 Annual Demographic Supplement   
  
Number (1000s) % Number   
  
(1000s) %   
  
Work disability No disability   
  
Disability Statistics Report 13 12   
  
Computer and Internet Use Among People With Disabilities 13   
  
People with disabilities are perhaps the single segment of society with the
most to gain from the new technologies of the electronic age. Yet they have
among the lowest rates of use of these technologies. As a result, the potential
benefits of computers and the Internet to the disability community are a long
way from being realized.   
  
The problem is largely one of access. Many people with disabilities are poor
and can little a ff o rd a computer capable of navigating the Internet, the
specialized software they might need in order to adapt it to their needs, and
the monthly charges imposed for access to the Internet. Many people with
disabilities, whether elderly or not, lack an awareness of the potential
benefits of this technology, an understanding that, for themselves especially,
a computer and an Internet connection could become not a toy, but an important
tool with   
  
which to gain greater independence and social integration.   
  
The advent of lower- cost computing including the free computers that come with
an extended subscription to an Internet service provider may help to make this
technology more available. Simpler user interfaces, which would encourage use
by people who are less comfortable with the technology, might also help people
with disabilities to overcome any resistance they might have to exploring the
Internet. But it seems clear that, in order to clarify the benefits that this
technology can offer to the population with disabilities, a concerted program
of education will be needed, along with training and support in the use of the
hardware and software, before significant progress is made in closing the
enormous gaps in technology access that have been identified in this report.   
  
CONCLUSIONS REFERENCES   
  
B u reau of the Census (1999). Source and Accuracy Statement for the December
1998 CPS Microdata File for Internet and Computer Use in the U. S. Available
online at:   
  
h t t p : / / w w w. b l s . c e n s u s . g o v / c p s / c o m p u t e r / 1
9 9 8 / s s r c a c c . h t m .   
  
National Telecommunications and Information Administration (1999). Falling
Through the Net: Defining the Digital Divide. Washington, DC: U. S. Department
of Commerce, National Telecommunications and Information Administration.
Available online at:   
  
h t t p : / / w w w. n t i a . d o c . g o v / n t i a h o m e / d i g i t a l
d i v i d e / i n d e x . h t m l

----------
End of Document




