Because icons vary from very representational to extremely abstract symbols in a user interface, an important issue faced by designers when designing an icon is how to select an appropriate design style for the image. There are no simple rules that can be followed by designers to determine the design style. The present study is intended to help designers to choose a proper design style for the icon at an early design stage. First, a classification of icons is summarized and the levels of stylization are discussed and demonstrated with examples. Then, thirty icons from several drawing packages and generally used symbols are selected, and a matching test is conducted to obtain the correct matching rates. The results are presented with some explanations for icon recognition and confusion, and finally how to select the right image function for icon design is discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArnheimR. (1969). Visual Thinking.University of California Press, Berkeley, Calif
2.
BarthelemyK.K.MazurK.M.ReisingJ.M. (1990). Color Coding and Size Enhancements of Switch Symbol Critical Features. Proceedings of the Human Factor Society — 34th Annual Meeting, 99–103
3.
BlattnerM.M.SumikawaD.A.GreenbergR.W. (1989). Earcons and Icons: Their Structure and Common Design Principles. Human-Computer Interaction, Volume, 4, 11–44
4.
DreyfussH. (1966). Case Study. Symbols for Industrial Use. In: KeepsG., (Ed.) Sign, Image and Symbol.NY: George Braziller, 1966, 126–133
5.
DreyfussH. (1972). Symbol Sourcebook.N.Y.: McGraw-Hill
6.
EasterbyR.S. (1967). Perceptual Organization in Static Displays for Man/Machine Systems. Ergonomics, 10, 195–205
7.
EasterbyR.S. (1970). The Perception of Symbols for Machine Displays. Ergonomics, 13(1), 149–158
8.
GittinsD. (1986). Icon-based human-computer interaction. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 24, 519–543
9.
HakielS.R.EasterbyR.S. (1987). Method for the Design and Evaluation of Icons for Human-Computer Interfaces.The IEE 2nd International Conference on Command, Control, Communications and Management Information Systems, Conference Publication Number 275, Bournemouth, England, 1–3 April
10.
HemenwayK. (1982). Psychological Issues in the Use of Icons in Command Menus. Proceedings of the CHI′82 Conference on Human Factors in Computer System, 21–24
11.
HowellW.C.FuchsA.F. (1968). Population Stereotypy in code design. Organizational Behaviour and Human Performance, 3, 310–339
12.
HugginsW.H.EntwisleD.R. (1984). Iconic Communication: An Annotated Bibliography.John Hopkin Press
13.
JonesS. (1983). Stereotypy in Pictograms of Abstract Concepts. Ergonomics, Vol. 26, No. 6, 605–611
14.
KolersP.A. (1969). Some Formal Characteristic of Pictograms. American Scientist, 57, 348–363
15.
LewisJ.R. (1988). A Review of Symbol Test Methodologies. (IBM Technical Report #54.475). Boca Raton, FL: IBM, Inc
16.
LinRungtai (1987). A Study of Nature Form for Basic Design Instruction. Journal of Technology, Vol. 2, No. 1, 17–24
17.
LoddingK.N. (1983). Iconic Interfacing. IEEE Computer Graphics and its Applications, 3, 11–20
18.
MarcusA. (1983). Graphic design for computer graphics. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, July, 63–70
19.
MarcusA. (1984). Corporate identity for iconic interface design: The graphic design perspective. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, December, 24–32
20.
MeyerR.P.LavesonJ.I. (1981). An Experience — Judgment Approach to Tactical Flight Training. Proceedings of the HF Society 25th Annual Meeting, 657–660
21.
MitchellW.J.T. (1986). Iconology: Image, Text, Ideology.The University of Chicago Press, 7–46
22.
ModelyR. (1966). Graphic Symbols for Worldwide Communication, In: KeepsG., (Ed.) Sign, Image and Symbol.NY: George Braziller, 1966, 108–125
23.
NolanP. R. (1989) Designing Screen Icons: Ranking and Matching Studies. Proceedings of the Human Factor Society — 33rd Annual Meeting, 380–384
24.
RogersY. (1986). Evaluating the meaningfulness of icon sets to represent command operations. Proceedings of HCI ′86 Conference on People and Computers: Designing for Usability, 586–603. London: British Computer Society
25.
RohrG. (1984) Understanding Visual Symbols. Proceedings of IEEE 1984 Workshop on Visual Language, 184–191
26.
RyanT.A.SchwartzC.B. (1956). Speed of Perception as a Function of Mode of Representation. American Journal of Psychology, 69, 193–199
27.
StammersR.B.GeorgeD.A.CareyM.S. (1989). An evaluation of abstract and concrete icons for a CAD package. In: MegawE.D. (Ed.) Contemporary Ergonomics 1989. (London: Taylor and Francis), 416–421
28.
SwezeyR.W.DavisE.G. (1983). A Case Study of Human Factors Guidelines in Computer Graphics. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 3(8), 21–30
29.
VoraP.HelanderM.SwedeH.WilsonJ. (1991). Developing Guidelines for Symbol Design: A Comparison of Evaluation Methodologies. Proceedings of Interface ′91, 6–11
