The Effects of Extended Practice on the Evaluation of Visual Display Codes

Christ, Richard E.; Corso, Gregory M.

doi:10.1177/001872088302500107

Cited by 35 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Not only does familiarity improve comprehension (e.g., Cahill, 1975), it also affects the usability of symbols, as has been shown by the considerable increase in users' performance after learning symbol-function relationships (e.g., Montagne, 2013). Additionally, it has been shown that familiarity and experience with a symbol reduces the impacts that other variables (e.g., concreteness level or the use of color) have on its comprehension (e.g., Christ & Corso, 1982;Isherwood, McDougall, & Curry, 2007;Stammers, George, & Carey, 1989). Thus, familiarity appears to be a key attribute for understanding symbols.…”

Section: Dimensions Of Interestmentioning

confidence: 95%

Lisbon Symbol Database (LSD): Subjective norms for 600 symbols

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article presents subjective rating norms for a new set of 600 symbols, depicting various contents (e.g., transportation, technology, and leisure activities) that can be used by researchers in different fields. Symbols were evaluated for aesthetic appeal, familiarity, visual complexity, concreteness, valence, arousal, and meaningfulness. The normative data were obtained from 388 participants, and no gender differences were found. Descriptive results (means, standard deviations, and confidence intervals) for each symbol in each dimension are presented. Overall, the dimensions were highly correlated. Additionally, participants were asked to briefly describe the meaning of each symbol. The results indicate that the present symbol set is varied, allowing for the selection of exemplars with different levels on the seven examined dimensions. This set of symbols constitutes a tool with potential for research in different areas. The database with all of the symbols is available as supplemental materials.

show abstract

Section: Dimensions Of Interestmentioning

confidence: 95%

Lisbon Symbol Database (LSD): Subjective norms for 600 symbols

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, performance differences between concrete and abstract symbols have been found to lessen with familiarity (Arend et al, 1987;Stammers et al, 1989). Similarly, the beneficial effects ofuse of color in displays has been found to diminish over time as novice users become more expert (Christ & Corso, 1982). Despite such findings, it is interesting to note that although overall performance may improve in response to familiar complex and simple symbols, response times remain slower to complex symbols even after they have been learned (Byrne, 1993).…”

Section: Concreteness and Meaningfulness Other Research-mentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring symbol and icon characteristics: Norms for concreteness, complexity, meaningfulness, familiarity, and semantic distance for 239 symbols

McDougall

Curry

Bruijn

1999

Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers

194

186

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper provides rating norms for a set of symbols and icons selected from a wide variety of sources. These ratings enable the effects of symbol characteristics on user performance to be systematically investigated, The symbol characteristics that have been quantified are considered to be of central relevance to symbol usability research and include concreteness, complexity, meaningfulness, familiarity,and semantic distance. The interrelationships between each ofthese dimensions is examined and the importance of using normative ratings for experimental research is discussed.

show abstract

“…Performance will depend on several important factors: (1) the nature of the mapping from objects to symbols, (2) familiarity and training, and (3) discriminability (Christ and Corso, 1983;Geiselman, Landee, and Christen, 1982).…”

Section: £:■■■!mentioning

confidence: 99%

Track Recognition Using Two-Dimensional Symbols or Three-Dimensional Realistic Icons

Smallman¹,

John²,

Oonk³

et al. 2000

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conventional tactical displays use nonrealistic two-dimensional (2-D) symbols to depict military assets. Prototypes of three-dimensional (3-D) tactical displays are being developed that depict assets using miniature realistic icons, mostly of ships and planes. Our objective was to test the performance benefits of these icons.In four experiments, we presented participants 10 common military platforms displayed as 3-D icons, 2-D icons, or conventional 2-D symbols (Military Standard 2525). We found that:• Symbols were identified faster than icons.• Symbols were identified more accurately than icons.• Symbols were identified better than icons even when the participants were experts.• Platform identification can be improved when the symbol includes the first letter of the platform unless more than one platform displays the same first letter.• 3-D icon identification accuracy varies with heading; this is not true for 2-D symbols.• 3-D icons are confused more often with platforms of the same category.• 2-D icons and 3-D icons were equally effective for platform identification.

show abstract

The Effects of Extended Practice on the Evaluation of Visual Display Codes

Cited by 35 publications

References 6 publications

Lisbon Symbol Database (LSD): Subjective norms for 600 symbols

Lisbon Symbol Database (LSD): Subjective norms for 600 symbols

Measuring symbol and icon characteristics: Norms for concreteness, complexity, meaningfulness, familiarity, and semantic distance for 239 symbols

Track Recognition Using Two-Dimensional Symbols or Three-Dimensional Realistic Icons

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About