Abstract
Most individuals with cognitive disabilities cannot understand textual communications, so this group might benefit from graphic symbols in instructions and warnings. Studies were carried out to investigate whether graphic symbols and instructions can indeed be understood by this group. A set of symbols was presented to two groups: non-retarded adults and adults with mild retardation. Two types of tests were employed: a comprehensibility test and a matching test. Non-retarded adults outperformed the adults with mild retardation on both tests. The latter group more often provided an incorrect interpretation of the symbols and often seemed to provide merely a description of the symbol instead of an extrapolation of its intended meaning. Abstract and ambiguous drawings were especially difficult for the retarded group. Symbols with realistic pictorial elements denoting concrete, simple objects seem to work best. There are indications that training in the meaning of the symbols may improve understanding.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.