Evaluating Choking Child Pictorial Symbols

Abstract

Two experiments evaluated pictorial symbols intended to warn consumers of a child choking hazard. In Experiment 1, participants used the Zwaga (1989) comprehension estimation procedure to estimate the percentage of the U.S. population they felt would understand the intended meaning of 15 symbols designed to depict a choking hazard. For the symbol with the highest comprehension estimate, participants indicated that 74% of the population would correctly interpret the intended meaning: choking. All of the top-rated symbols contained similar combinations of features, including crossed hands, a protruding tongue, and a frontal face orientation. But interestingly, symbols with lower comprehension estimates also contained a different set of similar features. In Experiment 2, small groups of participants constructed multiple panel choking hazard symbols from the set of 15 symbols in the first experiment. As in the first experiment, there was a high degree of consistency among participants' responses. Unexpectedly, the first and last symbols selected for this three-panel sequence were among symbols that received the lowest comprehension estimates in the first experiment. These findings seem to confirm that symbol comprehensibility can be influenced by context. Implications of this study for future research are discussed.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

American National Standard Institute. (1998). ANSI 535.3–1998: Criteria for safety symbols. Washington, DC: National Electrical Manufacturers Association.

Brantley

K.A.

Wogalter

M.S.

(1999). Oral and written symbol comprehension testing: The benefit of cognitive interview probing. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 43, 1060–1064.

Brugger

(1994). Public information symbols: A comparison of ISO testing procedures. Proceedings of Public Graphics. Lunteren: 26.1–26.11.

Dewar

(1994). Design and evaluation of graphic symbols. Proceedings of Public Graphics. Lunteren: 24.1–24.18.

Kalsher

M.J.

Wogalter

M.S.

Williams

K.J.

(1999). Allocation of responsibility for injuries from a “hidden” hazard. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 43, 598–602.

Silver

N.C.

Wogalter

M.S.

Brewster

B.M.

Glover

B.L.

Murray

L.A.

Tillotson

C.A.

Temple

T.L.

(1995). Comprehension and perceived quality of warning pictorials. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 39, 1057–1061.

Sojourner

Wogalter

M.S.

(1997). The influence of pictorials on evaluations of prescription medication instructions. Drug Information Journal, 31, 963–972.

Wolff

J. S.

Wogalter

M.S.

(1998). Comprehension of pictorial symbols: Effects of context and test method. Human Factors, 40, 173–186.

Zwaga

H.J.

(1989). Comprehensibility estimates of public information symbols: Their validity and use. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 33, 979–982.