2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.apergo.2019.102891
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Preference ranking test for different icon design formats for smart living room and bathroom functions

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
7
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
1
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In the current study, it is noticeable that if image-related icons are incorporated with textual labels, making it a combined format, the icon users favor them. Furthermore, despite the guideline given by the International Standards Organization [ 29 ] that the use of abstract symbols should be avoided, results of this study demonstrated that semi-abstract icons, which are combined image-related (concrete representation of an action or object) icons and concept-related or arbitrary icons (abstract representation of an action or object) [ 8 ], are still the most preferred on three function names—a result that is similar to that of Chi et al [ 5 ]. On the functions “avoid touching face” and “avoid travelling to places with known cases”, the red circle around the icons and the cross marks might have helped in relating them to their correct function names.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 80%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…In the current study, it is noticeable that if image-related icons are incorporated with textual labels, making it a combined format, the icon users favor them. Furthermore, despite the guideline given by the International Standards Organization [ 29 ] that the use of abstract symbols should be avoided, results of this study demonstrated that semi-abstract icons, which are combined image-related (concrete representation of an action or object) icons and concept-related or arbitrary icons (abstract representation of an action or object) [ 8 ], are still the most preferred on three function names—a result that is similar to that of Chi et al [ 5 ]. On the functions “avoid touching face” and “avoid travelling to places with known cases”, the red circle around the icons and the cross marks might have helped in relating them to their correct function names.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 80%
“…Concept-related and arbitrary icon design formats had consistently low ranking scores. This is understandable considering that concept-related icons outline concepts that are close but are still not the exact concrete image of the action or object, and arbitrary icons have no clear reference to their intended meaning and can only be meaningful and understood through education [ 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 ]. As a result, compared to the formats that obtained good ranking scores, the icons designed in these two formats do not have obvious mappings to their referent.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, in the case of the 'H model house', an abbreviation is used in the menu name of the energy management function, making it difficult for the user to understand the function intuitively. According to the study of Chi et al [56], there is no systematic relationship between words and their abbreviations, which makes the intuitive understanding of function difficult, so users have less preference for abbreviated menu names. Therefore, it is recommended to avoid using abbreviations in menu names.…”
Section: Cognitive Affordancesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For preference ranking analysis, the sum of the rank for each sample was calculated, and that of the two blank groups was averaged. The ranking data was analyzed by Friedman test at a significance level of α = 0.01 to evaluate significant differences among all samples [32]. The test statistic F is calculated in Equation ( 1) where R i is the sum of ranks for sample i; n and K are the number of valid assessors and samples, respectively.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%