Fifty university students participated in a laboratory experiment which examined 19 pictographic symbols previously used or proposed for labelling automobile controls and displays. Association norms, measures of familiarity, and magnitude estimates of the symbols' communicativeness were collected. Twenty of these subjects also participated in a paired-associate learning task and a two-alternative, forced-choice reaction-time task in which they made same-different judgments in response to verbally presented symbol labels followed by visually presented pictograms. It was found that, in general, the relative order of merit for the individual symbols was not consistent across tasks. Specifically, ratings of communicativeness were found to be well correlated with associative strength and to a lesser extent with reaction time, but associative strength was only weakly correlated with reaction time. Ease of learning was found to be an independent measure.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AdamsO. S.FittsP. M.RappaportM.WeinsteinM.Relations among some measures of pattern discriminability.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1954, 48, 81–88.
2.
AshleyF.MyerJ.SmithD.Architects & Planners. City signs and lights.Boston: Boston Redevelopment Authority, January, 1971.
3.
BrainardR. W.CampbellR. J.ElkinE. H.Design and interpretability of road signs.Journal of Applied Psychology, 1961, 45, 130–36.
4.
CahillM. C.Interpretability of graphic symbols as a function of context and experience factors.Journal of Applied Psychology, 1975, 60, 376–80.
5.
DewarR. E.SwansonH. A.Recognition of traffic control signs. National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council, Highway Research Board, Highway Research Record, 1972, 414, 16–23.
6.
FrankD.KoenigN.LendholtR.Identification of symbols for motor vehicle controls. Society of Automotive Engineers, Paper Number 730611, May, 1973.
7.
GuilfordJ. P.FruchterB.Fundamental statistics in psychology and education (5th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill, 1973.
8.
HeardE. A.Symbol study—1972. Society of Automotive Engineers, Paper Number 740304, February, 1974.
9.
HowellW. C.FuchsA. F.Population stereotype in code design. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance. 1968, 3, 310–339.
10.
International Standards Organization.Road vehicles-symbols for controls, indicators and tell-tales—Part I. Geneva, Switzerland: ISO Standard 2575/1–1973 (E). 1973.
11.
JackD. D.Identification of controls, a study of symbols. Society of Automotive Engineers, Paper Number 720203, January, 1972.
12.
JackD. D.HeardE. A.PewR. W.SAE research study in the interpretability of ISO vehicle controls symbols. Society of Automotive Engineers, Detroit branch office, Unpublished report of June 9, 1970.
13.
JandaH. F.VolkW. N.Effectiveness of various highway signs. National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council, Highway Research Board Proceedings, 1934, 14, 442–47.
14.
KarshR.MuddS. A.Design of a picture language to identify vehicle controls III. A comparative evaluation of selected picture-symbol designs. Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland: U. S. Army Human Engineering Laboratory Technical Memorandum 15–62, August, 1962.
15.
LauerA. R.Improvement in highway safety. National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council, Highway Research Board Proceedings, 1932, 12, 389–99.
16.
LendholtR.Identification of symbols and its influence on training for motor vehicle controls. Society of Automotive Engineers, Paper Number 740995, October, 1974.
17.
McCormackP. D.Identification of vehicle instrument panel controls. Society of Automotive Engineers, Paper Number 740996, October, 1974.
18.
MarkowitzJ.DietrichC. W.LeesW. J.FarmanM.An investigation of the design and performance of traffic control devices. Bolt Beranek & Newman, Inc. Report 1726, Contract #CPR-11–5955, 1968.
19.
MarshallG.CoferC. N.Associative indices as measures of word relatedness: A summary and comparison of ten methods.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1963, 1, 408–21.
20.
MuddS. A.KarshR.Design of a picture language to identify vehicle controls I. General method II. Investigation of population stereotypes. Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland: U. S. Army Human Engineering Technical Memorandum 22–61, August, 1961.
StevensS. S.Issues in Psychophysical Measurement.Psychological Review, 1971, 78, 426–450.
23.
TierneyW. J.KingL. E.Traffic signing-symbols versus words. VI World Highway Conferences of the International Road Federation. Montreal, Canada, October, 1970.
24.
U. S. Department of Transportation.Control location, identification, and illumination—passenger cars, multipurpose passenger vehicles, trucks, and buses. Washington, D.C.: Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 101, September, 1973.
25.
WalkerR. E.NicolayR. C.StearnsC. R.Comparative accuracy of recognizing American and international road signs.Journal of Applied Psychology, 1965, 49, 322–25.
26.
ZwagaH. J. G.Research on graphic symbols. University of Utrecht, Netherlands, Psychological Laboratory Report 74–4, May, 1974.
