Citation

Sloan G, Eshelman P. Proc. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Annu. Meet. 1981; 25(1): 198-202.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1981, Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Publisher SAGE Publishing)

DOI

10.1177/107118138102500150

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

The premise adopted in this study is that representatives of the audience for whom a symbol is intended should be participants in its evolution as well as subjects in its evaluation. Several situations in need of product misuse warnings were supplied by a manufacturer of ovenware products. Symbol design possibilities were first generated for each message category and then design input was obtained from a sample of potential product users. New design candidates were developed on the basis of subject recommendations. Study generated symbols proved to be significantly more effective than designs used by the manufacturer for the same message categories as assessed by differences in reaction time and error rate.
The relative effectiveness of different negation sign designs was also evaluated. Differences in both reaction time and subjective ranks of communicativeness suggest that a thin black cross is more effective in conveying negation than a thin black slash, a partial slash or cross, and a contour slash or cross. Significant differences were not found in the extent that the designs interfere with symbol recognition.

Language: en