2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.ergon.2015.09.018
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comprehension and redesign of recently introduced water-sport prohibitive symbols in South Korea

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…After a practice session to familiarize the participant with the setup and experimental procedure, comprehension tests were conducted for ten traffic symbols and the order of the displayed symbols was randomized. During the comprehension test, investigated signs were displayed using Tobii studio software (Tobii Technology), and the participant was asked to guess its actual meaning in an open-ended test [ 10 , 22 , 23 ]. Each participant was given a chance to look at the sign for 10 s, and after that, a new screen would prompt the question “What does the sign mean?” and participants had to give their answers verbally in Korean and ended it with “kkeut” (a Korean term for “ended”).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…After a practice session to familiarize the participant with the setup and experimental procedure, comprehension tests were conducted for ten traffic symbols and the order of the displayed symbols was randomized. During the comprehension test, investigated signs were displayed using Tobii studio software (Tobii Technology), and the participant was asked to guess its actual meaning in an open-ended test [ 10 , 22 , 23 ]. Each participant was given a chance to look at the sign for 10 s, and after that, a new screen would prompt the question “What does the sign mean?” and participants had to give their answers verbally in Korean and ended it with “kkeut” (a Korean term for “ended”).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Various evaluation methods have been developed in the past to measure the comprehensibility of the safety sign [ 4 – 10 ]; most of them rely on the guessability score and sometimes cognitive sign features. ISO 9186-1 specifies a method for testing the comprehensibility of graphical symbols and uses the guessability score (GS) from open-ended responses as a measure of the degree to which a graphical symbol communicates its intended message to recipients [ 8 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Jordan et al (1991) initially identified guessability as an important usability design component to measure the cost (time spent on tasks or mistakes made) paid by product users when performing a task for the first time, the higher the guessability, the lower the cost (Chan & Chan, 2013; Chan & Ng, 2010a; 2010b; 2012; Ng & Chan, 2007). Since users need to recognize symbols in a short time and try to avoid making mistakes, many previous studies (Chan & Chan, 2013; Chan & Ng, 2010a; 2010b; 2012; Liu et al, 2019; Ng & Chan, 2007; Siswandari et al, 2015) used guessability as a reasonable index for comprehensibility of a symbol, to investigate the comprehension performance of users with regard to symbols (Liu et al, 2019). So guessability score refers to the accuracy of guessing the meaning of a symbol, which is used to measure whether a symbol could or could not convey the intended meaning (Chan & Chan, 2013; Chan & Ng, 2010b; 2012; Siswandari et al, 2015).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since users need to recognize symbols in a short time and try to avoid making mistakes, many previous studies (Chan & Chan, 2013; Chan & Ng, 2010a; 2010b; 2012; Liu et al, 2019; Ng & Chan, 2007; Siswandari et al, 2015) used guessability as a reasonable index for comprehensibility of a symbol, to investigate the comprehension performance of users with regard to symbols (Liu et al, 2019). So guessability score refers to the accuracy of guessing the meaning of a symbol, which is used to measure whether a symbol could or could not convey the intended meaning (Chan & Chan, 2013; Chan & Ng, 2010b; 2012; Siswandari et al, 2015). Guessing performance refers to the participants’ overall level of performance during the guessing task (Chan & Chan, 2013; Chan & Ng, 2012).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…According to this principle, users can draw on their ideas about the symbols and designers analyze these ideas to extract representing graphics, which have “cognitive commonness”—that is, constrained by the experience of the objective world, the cognitions of a specific group of people share certain characteristics and patterns, which reflect the common cognitive structure of the group [ 11 , 12 , 13 ]. Finally, these graphics can be optimized to generate symbols that will best enhance user understanding [ 14 , 15 , 16 ]. Although it has been shown that the graphical expression may be affected by multiple factors, such as the users’ ability to present their ideas in graphics [ 17 ], education level [ 18 ], experience [ 7 ], and age [ 19 ], users influenced by these factors can still provide valuable ideas for symbol design [ 17 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%