cbrowser 16.7.1 → 16.8.0

package/docs/personas/Persona-LowVision.md

@@ -0,0 +1,133 @@
+# Low Vision User
+
+**Category**: Accessibility Personas
+**Description**: Users with partial visual impairment who rely on magnification, high contrast, or other visual adaptations to use interfaces
+
+## Overview
+
+Low vision users have significant visual impairment that cannot be fully corrected with glasses or contact lenses, but retain some functional vision. This includes conditions like macular degeneration, glaucoma, diabetic retinopathy, and cataracts. Unlike screen reader users who have no functional vision, low vision users navigate visually but under significantly constrained conditions.
+
+Low vision users employ various strategies to access digital content: screen magnification (often 200-800%), high contrast modes, color inversion, custom CSS overrides, and physical proximity to screens. These adaptations create a unique interaction paradigm where only a small portion of the interface is visible at any time, requiring extensive panning to understand page layout.
+
+The low vision experience reveals the importance of clear visual hierarchy, sufficient color contrast, text scalability, and reduced reliance on spatial relationships. Changes happening outside the magnified viewport may be completely missed, making change management particularly important for this persona.
+
+## Trait Profile
+
+All values on 0.0-1.0 scale.
+
+### Core Traits (Tier 1)
+
+| Trait | Value | Rationale |
+|-------|-------|-----------|
+| patience | 0.7 | Developed through adaptation; understand interactions take longer |
+| riskTolerance | 0.3 | Cautious; may miss visual cues that sighted users rely on |
+| comprehension | 0.7 | Cognitive abilities intact; visual access to information may be limited |
+| persistence | 0.8 | High; committed to completing tasks despite visual barriers |
+| curiosity | 0.5 | Moderate; exploration costly due to magnification requirements |
+| workingMemory | 0.6 | Normal capacity; some used for spatial memory of page layout |
+| readingTendency | 0.9 | Read thoroughly due to high cost of re-finding information |
+
+### Emotional Traits (Tier 2)
+
+| Trait | Value | Rationale |
+|-------|-------|-----------|
+| resilience | 0.7 | Adapted to challenges; developed coping strategies |
+| selfEfficacy | 0.6 | Confident with adapted strategies; aware of vision limitations |
+| trustCalibration | 0.5 | May miss visual trust cues; rely on text-based indicators |
+| interruptRecovery | 0.5 | Losing place in magnified view is costly |
+
+### Decision-Making Traits (Tier 3)
+
+| Trait | Value | Rationale |
+|-------|-------|-----------|
+| satisficing | 0.4 | Prefer thorough understanding; re-finding options is costly |
+| informationForaging | 0.5 | Systematic due to limited viewport; can't visually scan |
+| anchoringBias | 0.5 | Moderate; first option in magnified view may have advantage |
+| timeHorizon | 0.6 | Invest time to learn page layout for future efficiency |
+| attributionStyle | 0.5 | Understand interaction of vision limitations and design choices |
+
+### Planning Traits (Tier 4)
+
+| Trait | Value | Rationale |
+|-------|-------|-----------|
+| metacognitivePlanning | 0.7 | Strategic about navigation; minimize panning |
+| proceduralFluency | 0.6 | Develop routines for common sites and patterns |
+| transferLearning | 0.6 | Apply patterns but each site requires new spatial mapping |
+
+### Perception Traits (Tier 5)
+
+| Trait | Value | Rationale |
+|-------|-------|-----------|
+| changeBlindness | 0.2 | Low blindness - very attentive to visible changes; high blindness to changes outside viewport |
+| mentalModelRigidity | 0.5 | Rely on learned spatial layouts |
+
+### Social Traits (Tier 6)
+
+| Trait | Value | Rationale |
+|-------|-------|-----------|
+| authoritySensitivity | 0.5 | Moderate; evaluate based on accessibility |
+| emotionalContagion | 0.5 | Normal emotional sensitivity; may miss visual cues |
+| fomo | 0.4 | Focused on accessible content |
+| socialProofSensitivity | 0.5 | Value reviews from other low vision users |
+
+## Behavioral Patterns
+
+### Navigation
+Low vision users navigate by panning across magnified views, often using keyboard navigation to move between elements. They build mental maps of page layouts through exploration. Consistent layouts across pages are essential. They may use a combination of magnification and screen reader for different content types.
+
+### Decision Making
+Decisions require extensive exploration to understand all options. Users may not see all choices simultaneously. Clear labeling and consistent positioning help. Summary information at the beginning of sections reduces exploration requirements.
+
+### Error Recovery
+Error messages must be high contrast and appear in predictable locations. Focus management should move errors into the viewport. Errors appearing far from the triggering element may be missed entirely.
+
+### Abandonment Triggers
+- Low contrast text or interactive elements
+- Small text that doesn't scale properly
+- Information conveyed only through color
+- Important content appearing only on hover
+- Unpredictable layout changes
+- Fixed-size elements that can't be magnified
+- Interfaces that break at high zoom levels
+
+## UX Recommendations
+
+| Challenge | Recommendation |
+|-----------|----------------|
+| Limited viewport | Predictable layouts; essential info in consistent locations |
+| Contrast needs | WCAG AAA contrast ratios (7:1 for text, 4.5:1 for large text) |
+| Magnification | Responsive layouts that work at 200-400% zoom |
+| Color dependence | Never use color alone to convey information |
+| Spatial relationships | Programmatic associations (labels, headings); not just proximity |
+| Out-of-viewport changes | ARIA live regions; focus management for important updates |
+| Reading difficulty | Resizable text; sufficient line height and letter spacing |
+
+## Research Basis
+
+- Szpiro, S. et al. (2016). How people with low vision access computing devices - Behavior studies
+- Legge, G.E. (2007). Psychophysics of Reading in Normal and Low Vision
+- WCAG 2.2 Guidelines - Contrast and resizing requirements
+- Accessibility guidelines from AFB (American Foundation for the Blind)
+- Shneiderman, B. (2003). Designing for people with visual impairments
+
+## Usage
+
+```typescript
+await cognitive_journey_init({
+  persona: "low-vision",
+  goal: "complete checkout",
+  startUrl: "https://example.com"
+});
+```
+
+```bash
+npx cbrowser cognitive-journey --persona low-vision --start https://example.com --goal "complete checkout"
+```
+
+## See Also
+
+- [Persona Index](Persona-Index)
+- [Trait Index](../traits/Trait-Index)
+- [Reading Tendency](../traits/Trait-ReadingTendency.md)
+- [Persistence](../traits/Trait-Persistence.md)
+- [Change Blindness](../traits/Trait-ChangeBlindness.md)

package/docs/personas/Persona-MobileUser.md

@@ -0,0 +1,133 @@
+# Mobile User
+
+**Category**: General Users
+**Description**: Users primarily accessing interfaces through mobile devices, often in contexts with divided attention and time pressure
+
+## Overview
+
+Mobile users interact with digital interfaces in fundamentally different ways than desktop users. They typically operate in contexts characterized by divided attention, physical movement, variable connectivity, and time pressure. The mobile context transforms user behavior regardless of the user's underlying cognitive abilities.
+
+The mobile experience is defined by constraints and interruptions. Screen real estate is limited, requiring prioritization of the most essential content and actions. Touch input replaces precision mouse interactions. Users often engage in "snacking" behavior - brief, interrupted sessions between other activities. This context creates unique patterns of satisficing, impatience, and goal-focused behavior.
+
+Mobile users are not less capable than desktop users; rather, they operate under situational constraints that affect their interaction patterns. A user who carefully reads documentation on desktop may skim on mobile. Understanding this context is essential for designing effective mobile experiences.
+
+## Trait Profile
+
+All values on 0.0-1.0 scale.
+
+### Core Traits (Tier 1)
+
+| Trait | Value | Rationale |
+|-------|-------|-----------|
+| patience | 0.3 | Mobile context creates time pressure; users expect immediate responses |
+| riskTolerance | 0.5 | Moderate; willing to act quickly but cautious about security on mobile |
+| comprehension | 0.6 | Capability unchanged but limited attention reduces effective comprehension |
+| persistence | 0.4 | Low commitment to any single session; will abandon and return later |
+| curiosity | 0.4 | Goal-focused rather than exploratory; minimize time spent in app |
+| workingMemory | 0.5 | Capacity unchanged but divided attention reduces available resources |
+| readingTendency | 0.2 | Skim headlines; rely on visual hierarchy; rarely read body text |
+
+### Emotional Traits (Tier 2)
+
+| Trait | Value | Rationale |
+|-------|-------|-----------|
+| resilience | 0.5 | Brief frustration but quick to try alternatives rather than persist |
+| selfEfficacy | 0.6 | Generally confident with mobile interfaces |
+| trustCalibration | 0.5 | Balanced; aware of mobile security concerns |
+| interruptRecovery | 0.5 | Expect interruptions; design mental models around resumption |
+
+### Decision-Making Traits (Tier 3)
+
+| Trait | Value | Rationale |
+|-------|-------|-----------|
+| satisficing | 0.8 | Accept first reasonable option; minimize decision time |
+| informationForaging | 0.5 | Quick scans for obvious information; abandon if not found |
+| anchoringBias | 0.5 | First-seen options have advantage but less commitment overall |
+| timeHorizon | 0.3 | Focus on immediate task; minimize time investment |
+| attributionStyle | 0.5 | Balanced attribution; expect mobile to be different |
+
+### Planning Traits (Tier 4)
+
+| Trait | Value | Rationale |
+|-------|-------|-----------|
+| metacognitivePlanning | 0.4 | Less planning; reactive to immediate needs |
+| proceduralFluency | 0.6 | Familiar with mobile conventions (swipe, tap, etc.) |
+| transferLearning | 0.6 | Apply mobile patterns across apps |
+
+### Perception Traits (Tier 5)
+
+| Trait | Value | Rationale |
+|-------|-------|-----------|
+| changeBlindness | 0.6 | May miss changes while attention divided; rely on clear notifications |
+| mentalModelRigidity | 0.5 | Expect mobile conventions; frustrated by non-standard patterns |
+
+### Social Traits (Tier 6)
+
+| Trait | Value | Rationale |
+|-------|-------|-----------|
+| authoritySensitivity | 0.5 | Moderate; skeptical of mobile ads and promotions |
+| emotionalContagion | 0.5 | Moderate influence from visual design |
+| fomo | 0.6 | Mobile creates urgency; notifications drive engagement |
+| socialProofSensitivity | 0.6 | App store ratings and reviews influence choices |
+
+## Behavioral Patterns
+
+### Navigation
+Mobile users rely on familiar patterns: bottom navigation, hamburger menus, swipe gestures. They expect single-hand operation for most tasks. Deep hierarchies are problematic; prefer flat architecture with clear entry points. Search is often preferred over navigation for finding specific items.
+
+### Decision Making
+Decisions are rapid and often based on minimal information. The top option or featured choice has significant advantage. Users rarely scroll below the fold for options. Price and key differentiators must be immediately visible.
+
+### Error Recovery
+Low tolerance for errors that interrupt flow. Errors should be recoverable without losing progress. Form validation should be inline and immediate. Connectivity errors should allow offline operation or easy retry.
+
+### Abandonment Triggers
+- Slow load times (over 3 seconds)
+- Forced desktop-style interactions
+- Lengthy forms without progress saving
+- Pop-ups and interstitials
+- Unclear touch targets
+- Required account creation for simple tasks
+- Poor cellular connectivity handling
+
+## UX Recommendations
+
+| Challenge | Recommendation |
+|-----------|----------------|
+| Time pressure | Minimize steps; allow task completion in under 2 minutes |
+| Divided attention | Clear visual hierarchy; essential info "above the fold" |
+| Limited screen space | Progressive disclosure; prioritize ruthlessly |
+| Touch input | Generous touch targets (minimum 44x44 pixels); forgiving hit areas |
+| Interrupted sessions | Save state automatically; enable easy resumption |
+| Variable connectivity | Offline capability; graceful degradation; queue actions |
+| Low reading tendency | Visual communication; icons with text; clear CTAs |
+
+## Research Basis
+
+- Chittaro, L. (2011). Mobile HCI research methods - Context-specific user behavior
+- Hoober, S. & Berkman, E. (2012). Designing Mobile Interfaces - Touch interaction patterns
+- Nielsen, J. (2012). Mobile Usability - Mobile vs desktop behavior differences
+- Google/SOASTA (2017). Mobile page speed benchmarks - Load time impact on conversion
+- Budiu, R. (2015). Mobile User Experience - Attention and task completion research
+
+## Usage
+
+```typescript
+await cognitive_journey_init({
+  persona: "mobile-user",
+  goal: "complete checkout",
+  startUrl: "https://example.com"
+});
+```
+
+```bash
+npx cbrowser cognitive-journey --persona mobile-user --start https://example.com --goal "complete checkout"
+```
+
+## See Also
+
+- [Persona Index](Persona-Index)
+- [Trait Index](../traits/Trait-Index)
+- [Patience](../traits/Trait-Patience.md)
+- [Satisficing](../traits/Trait-Satisficing.md)
+- [Reading Tendency](../traits/Trait-ReadingTendency.md)

package/docs/personas/Persona-MotorTremor.md

@@ -0,0 +1,133 @@
+# Motor Tremor User
+
+**Category**: Accessibility Personas
+**Description**: Users with motor control impairments affecting precise movements, such as essential tremor, Parkinson's disease, or other neuromuscular conditions
+
+## Overview
+
+Motor tremor users experience involuntary shaking or movement that affects their ability to perform precise motor tasks. This includes difficulty with small click targets, drag-and-drop interactions, hover states, and any interface element requiring steady, accurate movement. Conditions causing tremor range from essential tremor (the most common movement disorder) to Parkinson's disease, multiple sclerosis, and age-related motor changes.
+
+Users with motor tremor have developed strategies to compensate for their movement challenges. They often use keyboard navigation when possible, stabilize their arms against surfaces, use assistive technologies like switch access or adapted mice, and approach interaction targets with deliberate care. They have learned to be patient with themselves and with interfaces.
+
+The challenges faced by motor tremor users highlight the importance of generous click targets, keyboard alternatives, and forgiving interaction patterns. Many design improvements for this persona benefit all users, including those using touch screens in moving vehicles or with temporary motor impairments.
+
+## Trait Profile
+
+All values on 0.0-1.0 scale.
+
+### Core Traits (Tier 1)
+
+| Trait | Value | Rationale |
+|-------|-------|-----------|
+| patience | 0.9 | Developed through necessity; understand that interactions will take more time |
+| riskTolerance | 0.2 | Very cautious; misclicks can have unwanted consequences |
+| comprehension | 0.7 | Unaffected by motor impairment; cognitive abilities intact |
+| persistence | 0.8 | High; committed to completing tasks despite physical challenges |
+| curiosity | 0.5 | Moderate; exploration limited by interaction cost |
+| workingMemory | 0.7 | Normal capacity; may be partially occupied by motor planning |
+| readingTendency | 0.6 | Moderate; read carefully to avoid needing re-interaction |
+
+### Emotional Traits (Tier 2)
+
+| Trait | Value | Rationale |
+|-------|-------|-----------|
+| resilience | 0.7 | Developed through adapting to physical challenges |
+| selfEfficacy | 0.6 | Confident in abilities but aware of limitations |
+| trustCalibration | 0.6 | Appropriately cautious about committing to actions |
+| interruptRecovery | 0.6 | Moderate; interruptions less costly than for some personas |
+
+### Decision-Making Traits (Tier 3)
+
+| Trait | Value | Rationale |
+|-------|-------|-----------|
+| satisficing | 0.3 | Low; prefer to choose carefully to avoid need for corrections |
+| informationForaging | 0.6 | Thorough to reduce need for repeated navigation |
+| anchoringBias | 0.5 | Moderate; don't favor first option if requiring corrections |
+| timeHorizon | 0.6 | Willing to invest time upfront to avoid future corrections |
+| attributionStyle | 0.5 | Understand interaction between personal abilities and interface design |
+
+### Planning Traits (Tier 4)
+
+| Trait | Value | Rationale |
+|-------|-------|-----------|
+| metacognitivePlanning | 0.7 | Plan interactions carefully to minimize motor demands |
+| proceduralFluency | 0.6 | Develop routines but each interaction requires conscious effort |
+| transferLearning | 0.6 | Apply accessibility patterns across contexts |
+
+### Perception Traits (Tier 5)
+
+| Trait | Value | Rationale |
+|-------|-------|-----------|
+| changeBlindness | 0.5 | Normal visual attention; may miss changes during motor focus |
+| mentalModelRigidity | 0.5 | Moderate; expect accessibility considerations |
+
+### Social Traits (Tier 6)
+
+| Trait | Value | Rationale |
+|-------|-------|-----------|
+| authoritySensitivity | 0.5 | Moderate; evaluate based on accessibility support |
+| emotionalContagion | 0.5 | Normal emotional sensitivity |
+| fomo | 0.4 | Lower; focused on accessible experiences |
+| socialProofSensitivity | 0.5 | Value accessibility reviews from others with motor impairments |
+
+## Behavioral Patterns
+
+### Navigation
+Motor tremor users favor keyboard navigation over mouse/touch when possible. When using a pointer, they approach targets slowly and deliberately, often using arm stabilization. They benefit from large click targets and avoid hover-dependent interactions. Sticky menus that require precise mouse control are particularly challenging.
+
+### Decision Making
+Decisions are careful and deliberate because correction costs are high. Users prefer to understand all implications before committing to an action. Preview functionality is valuable. The ability to undo or correct without extensive re-navigation is essential.
+
+### Error Recovery
+Errors caused by misclicks are frustrating and common. Error recovery should not require precise motor control. Confirmation dialogs should have well-spaced buttons. The ability to undo actions reduces the cost of accidental clicks.
+
+### Abandonment Triggers
+- Small click targets (under 44x44 pixels)
+- Hover-only interactions with no click alternative
+- Drag-and-drop without keyboard alternative
+- Time-limited interactions during data entry
+- Sliding/swiping interactions requiring precise control
+- Double-click requirements
+- Captchas requiring precise interaction
+
+## UX Recommendations
+
+| Challenge | Recommendation |
+|-----------|----------------|
+| Small click targets | Minimum 44x44 pixel touch targets; larger for primary actions |
+| Precision requirements | Forgiving click areas; expand clickable region beyond visual boundary |
+| Hover interactions | Provide click/keyboard alternatives; persistent hover states |
+| Drag and drop | Keyboard alternatives; click-to-select + click-to-place pattern |
+| Misclick recovery | Generous undo; confirmation for destructive actions |
+| Time pressure | Disable timeouts for form inputs; extend session limits |
+| Complex gestures | Simple tap/click alternatives to swipes and multi-touch |
+
+## Research Basis
+
+- Trewin, S. & Pain, H. (1999). Keyboard and mouse errors due to motor impairments - Empirical studies
+- Keates, S. et al. (2002). Cursor measures for motion-impaired users - Design recommendations
+- WCAG 2.2 Target Size guidelines (2.5.5, 2.5.8) - Minimum target sizes
+- MacKenzie, I.S. & Jusoh, S. (2001). Evaluation of pointing devices for users with motor impairments
+- Wobbrock, J.O. & Gajos, K.Z. (2008). Ability-based design - Adapting interfaces to abilities
+
+## Usage
+
+```typescript
+await cognitive_journey_init({
+  persona: "motor-tremor",
+  goal: "complete checkout",
+  startUrl: "https://example.com"
+});
+```
+
+```bash
+npx cbrowser cognitive-journey --persona motor-tremor --start https://example.com --goal "complete checkout"
+```
+
+## See Also
+
+- [Persona Index](Persona-Index)
+- [Trait Index](../traits/Trait-Index)
+- [Patience](../traits/Trait-Patience.md)
+- [Persistence](../traits/Trait-Persistence.md)
+- [Risk Tolerance](../traits/Trait-RiskTolerance.md)

package/docs/personas/Persona-PowerUser.md

@@ -0,0 +1,129 @@
+# Power User
+
+**Category**: General Users
+**Description**: Expert users who prioritize efficiency and keyboard shortcuts over traditional UI navigation
+
+## Overview
+
+Power users represent the most technically proficient segment of any application's user base. They have extensive experience with digital interfaces and have developed highly optimized workflows for accomplishing tasks. These users often come from technical backgrounds or have invested significant time mastering their tools.
+
+Power users are characterized by their impatience with slow interfaces and their preference for direct manipulation over guided experiences. They frequently discover and utilize keyboard shortcuts, hidden features, and power-user modes that casual users never encounter. Their mental models of application behavior are sophisticated, allowing them to predict outcomes and troubleshoot issues independently.
+
+The primary challenge when designing for power users is providing sufficient depth and efficiency without cluttering the interface for less experienced users. Progressive disclosure and customizable interfaces serve this persona well. Power users are also valuable sources of edge-case feedback and can stress-test applications in ways that reveal subtle bugs.
+
+## Trait Profile
+
+All values on 0.0-1.0 scale.
+
+### Core Traits (Tier 1)
+
+| Trait | Value | Rationale |
+|-------|-------|-----------|
+| patience | 0.3 | Research by Nielsen Norman Group shows expert users expect sub-second response times and become frustrated with delays that beginners tolerate |
+| riskTolerance | 0.8 | Expertise breeds confidence; power users willingly explore unfamiliar features knowing they can recover from mistakes |
+| comprehension | 0.9 | Years of experience produce strong pattern recognition and ability to quickly understand new interfaces by analogy |
+| persistence | 0.7 | Will invest effort for efficiency gains, but may abandon poorly-designed tools for alternatives |
+| curiosity | 0.8 | Actively explore interface capabilities beyond immediate task requirements |
+| workingMemory | 0.9 | Can juggle multiple interface states, remember deep navigation paths, and track complex multi-step procedures |
+| readingTendency | 0.2 | Skip documentation and tutorials; prefer to learn by doing and experimentation |
+
+### Emotional Traits (Tier 2)
+
+| Trait | Value | Rationale |
+|-------|-------|-----------|
+| resilience | 0.8 | Errors are learning opportunities; rarely become discouraged by interface problems |
+| selfEfficacy | 0.9 | Strong confidence in ability to figure things out independently |
+| trustCalibration | 0.7 | Appropriately skeptical of claims; verify functionality themselves |
+| interruptRecovery | 0.9 | Strong mental models allow quick context restoration after interruptions |
+
+### Decision-Making Traits (Tier 3)
+
+| Trait | Value | Rationale |
+|-------|-------|-----------|
+| satisficing | 0.4 | Often seek optimal solutions rather than accepting "good enough" |
+| informationForaging | 0.9 | Efficient at finding information; know where to look and when to stop |
+| anchoringBias | 0.3 | Flexible thinking; update mental models based on new information |
+| timeHorizon | 0.7 | Will invest time upfront to save time later (learning shortcuts, setting up workflows) |
+| attributionStyle | 0.6 | Balanced attribution; recognize both system and user contributions to outcomes |
+
+### Planning Traits (Tier 4)
+
+| Trait | Value | Rationale |
+|-------|-------|-----------|
+| metacognitivePlanning | 0.8 | Consciously optimize their approach; think about how they're thinking |
+| proceduralFluency | 0.9 | Automated many common procedures through practice |
+| transferLearning | 0.9 | Readily apply knowledge from one context to another |
+
+### Perception Traits (Tier 5)
+
+| Trait | Value | Rationale |
+|-------|-------|-----------|
+| changeBlindness | 0.3 | Attentive to interface changes; notice subtle differences |
+| mentalModelRigidity | 0.4 | Adaptable but may have strong preferences based on past experience |
+
+### Social Traits (Tier 6)
+
+| Trait | Value | Rationale |
+|-------|-------|-----------|
+| authoritySensitivity | 0.3 | Skeptical of recommendations; prefer to evaluate for themselves |
+| emotionalContagion | 0.3 | Less influenced by others' emotional reactions to interfaces |
+| fomo | 0.5 | Moderately interested in new features; balanced by efficiency concerns |
+| socialProofSensitivity | 0.3 | Form independent opinions; less swayed by popularity |
+
+## Behavioral Patterns
+
+### Navigation
+Power users prefer keyboard navigation, command palettes, and direct URL manipulation. They memorize shortcuts and use them reflexively. They often disable animations and prefer information-dense displays over whitespace-heavy designs. Back button usage is minimal as they navigate purposefully.
+
+### Decision Making
+Decisions are rapid and confident. Power users quickly evaluate options based on efficiency criteria. They experiment freely, knowing they can undo or recover. They often make decisions based on heuristics developed through extensive experience rather than careful analysis of each situation.
+
+### Error Recovery
+Self-sufficient error recovery is the norm. Power users read error messages carefully, check console logs, and attempt multiple solutions before seeking help. They often discover workarounds and may document solutions for others.
+
+### Abandonment Triggers
+- Slow performance or unnecessary loading states
+- Forced tutorials or onboarding flows
+- Missing keyboard shortcuts for common actions
+- Inability to customize or configure the interface
+- Patronizing or overly-simplified explanations
+
+## UX Recommendations
+
+| Challenge | Recommendation |
+|-----------|----------------|
+| Impatience with slow interfaces | Optimize for speed; lazy-load non-critical content; show loading progress |
+| Desire for efficiency | Implement comprehensive keyboard shortcuts; add command palette |
+| Low tolerance for friction | Provide "expert mode" that reduces confirmations and simplifies workflows |
+| Tendency to skip instructions | Use progressive disclosure; surface advanced features contextually |
+| Need for customization | Allow interface customization, saved preferences, and workflow automation |
+
+## Research Basis
+
+- Nielsen, J. (1993). Usability Engineering - Expert vs novice user behavior patterns
+- Shneiderman, B. (2003). Designing the User Interface - Skill acquisition and expertise
+- Carroll, J.M. (1990). The Nurnberg Funnel - Minimal manuals and power user behavior
+- Cockburn, A. et al. (2007). Keyboard vs mouse efficiency studies
+- Dix, A. (2004). Human-Computer Interaction - Expert user mental models
+
+## Usage
+
+```typescript
+await cognitive_journey_init({
+  persona: "power-user",
+  goal: "complete checkout",
+  startUrl: "https://example.com"
+});
+```
+
+```bash
+npx cbrowser cognitive-journey --persona power-user --start https://example.com --goal "complete checkout"
+```
+
+## See Also
+
+- [Persona Index](Persona-Index)
+- [Trait Index](../traits/Trait-Index)
+- [Patience](../traits/Trait-Patience.md)
+- [Comprehension](../traits/Trait-Comprehension.md)
+- [Working Memory](../traits/Trait-WorkingMemory.md)

package/docs/personas/Persona-ScreenReaderUser.md

@@ -0,0 +1,133 @@
+# Screen Reader User
+
+**Category**: Accessibility Personas
+**Description**: Users who navigate interfaces entirely through screen reader technology due to visual impairment
+
+## Overview
+
+Screen reader users experience digital interfaces in a fundamentally different way than sighted users. Rather than visual scanning and spatial recognition, they rely on sequential audio presentation of content and keyboard-based navigation. This transforms the interaction paradigm from visual to linear and auditory.
+
+Screen reader users have often developed exceptional patience and persistence through necessity. They navigate a digital world largely designed without their needs in mind, requiring them to develop sophisticated mental models and problem-solving strategies. Their comprehension of content tends to be high because they must process every element sequentially rather than skimming.
+
+The screen reader experience exposes accessibility failures that may be invisible to sighted users: missing alt text, improper heading hierarchy, unlabeled form fields, focus management issues, and dynamic content that isn't announced. Testing with this persona reveals fundamental accessibility barriers.
+
+## Trait Profile
+
+All values on 0.0-1.0 scale.
+
+### Core Traits (Tier 1)
+
+| Trait | Value | Rationale |
+|-------|-------|-----------|
+| patience | 0.9 | Developed through necessity; screen reader navigation is inherently slower |
+| riskTolerance | 0.2 | Low; unexpected behaviors can cause disorientation without visual context |
+| comprehension | 0.8 | High; sequential processing encourages deep understanding |
+| persistence | 0.9 | Extremely high; accustomed to working around accessibility barriers |
+| curiosity | 0.6 | Interested in exploring but cautious about unfamiliar interfaces |
+| workingMemory | 0.7 | Often enhanced through training; must hold page structure mentally |
+| readingTendency | 0.9 | All content is "read"; rely entirely on text and audio |
+
+### Emotional Traits (Tier 2)
+
+| Trait | Value | Rationale |
+|-------|-------|-----------|
+| resilience | 0.8 | High; regularly encounter and overcome accessibility barriers |
+| selfEfficacy | 0.7 | Confident in abilities despite environmental barriers |
+| trustCalibration | 0.6 | Appropriately cautious; can't visually verify safety cues |
+| interruptRecovery | 0.6 | Moderate; can recover but interruptions more costly without visual context |
+
+### Decision-Making Traits (Tier 3)
+
+| Trait | Value | Rationale |
+|-------|-------|-----------|
+| satisficing | 0.5 | Balanced; may accept accessible option over optimal inaccessible one |
+| informationForaging | 0.6 | Systematic but slower; use headings, landmarks, and skip links |
+| anchoringBias | 0.5 | Moderate; sequential presentation creates different anchoring |
+| timeHorizon | 0.6 | Willing to invest time for accessibility; balance with efficiency |
+| attributionStyle | 0.6 | Often recognize system (accessibility) failures vs personal limitations |
+
+### Planning Traits (Tier 4)
+
+| Trait | Value | Rationale |
+|-------|-------|-----------|
+| metacognitivePlanning | 0.7 | Strategic about navigation; plan routes through complex pages |
+| proceduralFluency | 0.8 | Highly developed screen reader navigation skills |
+| transferLearning | 0.7 | Apply accessibility patterns across sites that follow standards |
+
+### Perception Traits (Tier 5)
+
+| Trait | Value | Rationale |
+|-------|-------|-----------|
+| changeBlindness | 0.5 | Rely on proper ARIA live regions; may miss unannounced changes |
+| mentalModelRigidity | 0.6 | Expect accessibility standards to be followed |
+
+### Social Traits (Tier 6)
+
+| Trait | Value | Rationale |
+|-------|-------|-----------|
+| authoritySensitivity | 0.5 | Moderate; evaluate based on accessibility experience |
+| emotionalContagion | 0.5 | Moderate; visual emotional cues not available |
+| fomo | 0.4 | Lower; focused on what's accessible rather than everything |
+| socialProofSensitivity | 0.5 | Value accessibility reviews from other screen reader users |
+
+## Behavioral Patterns
+
+### Navigation
+Screen reader users navigate primarily via keyboard using landmarks, headings, links, and form elements. They use skip links when available and rely on proper semantic HTML. Tab order must be logical. They often explore page structure first using heading navigation (H key in screen readers) before diving into content.
+
+### Decision Making
+Decisions are based entirely on textual and announced information. Visual design cues are irrelevant. Proper labeling is essential for all interactive elements. Decisions may be slower due to sequential information access but are often more informed.
+
+### Error Recovery
+Error recovery requires clear, text-based feedback that is properly announced. Focus management after errors is critical - focus should move to the error message or affected field. Errors must not trap keyboard focus or create navigation dead-ends.
+
+### Abandonment Triggers
+- Inaccessible CAPTCHAs without alternatives
+- Unlabeled form fields
+- Focus traps in modals or custom widgets
+- Missing skip links on repetitive content
+- Images without alt text conveying essential information
+- Dynamic content that isn't announced
+- Keyboard-inaccessible interactions
+
+## UX Recommendations
+
+| Challenge | Recommendation |
+|-----------|----------------|
+| Sequential navigation | Proper heading hierarchy; skip links; landmark regions |
+| Unlabeled controls | ARIA labels for all interactive elements; descriptive link text |
+| Focus management | Logical tab order; focus management for dynamic content |
+| Dynamic updates | ARIA live regions for status changes; announcements for loading |
+| Time-limited content | Sufficient time; ability to extend; pause auto-updating content |
+| Complex interactions | Keyboard accessibility; ARIA widgets following WAI-ARIA patterns |
+| Form errors | Announce errors; move focus; clear error descriptions |
+
+## Research Basis
+
+- WebAIM Screen Reader User Survey #10 (2024) - User preferences and behavior patterns
+- WCAG 2.2 Guidelines - Technical accessibility requirements
+- Lazar, J. et al. (2007). Frustration of blind users on the web - Empirical studies
+- Power, C. et al. (2012). Guidelines are only half the story - User experience research
+- Petrie, H. & Kheir, O. (2007). Relationship between accessibility and usability
+
+## Usage
+
+```typescript
+await cognitive_journey_init({
+  persona: "screen-reader-user",
+  goal: "complete checkout",
+  startUrl: "https://example.com"
+});
+```
+
+```bash
+npx cbrowser cognitive-journey --persona screen-reader-user --start https://example.com --goal "complete checkout"
+```
+
+## See Also
+
+- [Persona Index](Persona-Index)
+- [Trait Index](../traits/Trait-Index)
+- [Persistence](../traits/Trait-Persistence.md)
+- [Patience](../traits/Trait-Patience.md)
+- [Reading Tendency](../traits/Trait-ReadingTendency.md)