Attention in Construction Signs: A Comparative Eye-Tracking Analysis of Text,Signal Words,and Pictograms

Abstract

Construction signs may combine text, signal words, and pictograms to convey safety information, but how these elements collectively capture attention and impact memory is underexplored. This study uses eye-tracking and a subsequent memory test to investigate visual attention distribution and recognition performance for construction signs featuring text, signal words, and pictograms. Twenty participants viewed 20 signs for 5 seconds each while their eye movements were recorded across three Areas of Interest (AOIs): signal word, text, and pictogram. Results showed significantly greater visual attention allocated to the text AOI, evidenced by longer fixation durations, more fixations, shorter time to first fixation, and more visits compared to both signal word and pictogram AOIs. Signal words received the least attention. A subsequent memory test revealed moderate recognition accuracy (hit rate = 0.84, d-prime = 2.04) for the signs as a whole. Findings suggest that within multi-component signs, text commands the most cognitive processing and likely plays a crucial role in overall sign comprehension and memory encoding, while pictograms serve a complementary, rapid recognition role. These results emphasize the importance of clear, prominent text, supported by comprehensible pictograms, in designing effective construction safety signs to enhance hazard communication and worker safety.

Keywords

eye-tracking construction safety hazard communication construction signs visual attention

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Chan

A. H. S.

A. W. Y.

(2010). Investigation of guessability of industrial safety signs: Effects of prospective-user factors and cognitive sign features. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 40(6), 689–697. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2010.05.002

Chen

Wang

R. Q.

Lin

Guo

(2018). Measuring the cognitive loads of construction safety sign designs during selective and sustained attention. Safety Science, 105, 9–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2018.01.020

Ding

Fan

Shi

(2023). Test the effectiveness of building safety guidance signs in a T-junction corridor based on eye movement data. Journal of Safety Science and Resilience, 4(2), 123–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnlssr.2022.11.001

Dong

Lehto

Esmaeili

(2024). Determining the effectiveness of construction safety signs: An eye-tracking study. Construction Research Congress, 2024, 854–864. https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784485293.085

Dong

Yu-Chin

Esmaeili

. (2025a). Brain activity patterns while viewing construction signs: AN EEG Study of attention and memory encoding. In CIB Conferences (Vol. 1, No. 1, p. 367). Perdue University.

Dong

Yu-Chin

Lehto

M. R.

Esmaeili

. (2025b). Exploring the impact of construction sign design on memory recall and Decision Confidence: A Cognitive Approach. In IISE Annual Conference. Proceedings (pp. 1–6). Institute of Industrial and Systems Engineers (IISE).

Dowse

Ehlers

(2005). Medicine labels incorporating pictograms: do they influence understanding and adherence? Patient Education and Counseling, 58(1), 63–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2004.06.012

Duarte

Rebelo

Teles

Wogalter

M. S.

(2014). Safety sign comprehension by students, adult workers and disabled persons with cerebral palsy. Safety Science, 62, 175–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2013.08.007

Fang

Gao

Zhang

Niu

Ding

(2022). Influencing Mechanism of Safety Sign Features on Visual Attention of Construction Workers: A Study Based on Eye-Tracking Technology. Buildings, 12(11), 1883. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12111883

10.

Laughery

K. R.

(2006). Safety communications: Warnings. Applied Ergonomics, 37(4), 467–478. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2006.04.020

11.

Lehto

M. R.

(1992). Designing warning signs and warning labels: Part II - Scientific basis for initial guidelines. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 10(1–2), 115–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-8141(92)90053-3

12.

Lehto

M. R.

(2006). Optimal warnings: An information and decision theoretic perspective. In Wogalter

M. S.

(Ed.), Handbook of warnings (pp. 89–108). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

13.

Lesch

M. F.

(2003). Comprehension and memory for warning symbols: Age-related differences and impact of training. Journal of Safety Research, 34(5), 495–505. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2003.05.003

14.

Wogalter

M. S.

Conzola

V. C.

Smith-Jackson

T. L.

(2002). Research-based guidelines for warning design and evaluation. Applied Ergonomics, 33(3), 219–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0003-6870(02)00009-1

15.

Wogalter

M. S.

Silver

N. C.

Leonard

S. D.

Zaikina

(2006). Warning symbols. In Wogalter

M. S.

(Ed.), Handbook of warnings (pp. 159–176). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

16.

Wogalter

M. S.

Sojourner

R. J.

Brelsford

J. W.

(1997). Comprehension and retention of safety pictorials. Ergonomics, 40(5), 531–542. https://doi.org/10.1080/001401397188017

17.

Wogalter

M. S.

Vigilante

W. J.

Jr. (2006). Attention switch and maintenance. In Wogalter

M. S.

(Ed.), Handbook of warnings (pp. 245–265). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.