Citation

Hicks KE, Bell JL, Wogalter MS. Proc. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Annu. Meet. 2003; 47(14): 1735-1739.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2003, Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Publisher SAGE Publishing)

DOI

10.1177/154193120304701404

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Pictorial development and testing can be a costly and inefficient process. The process of designing and testing pictorial symbols could benefit from a precursor test to determine the likelihood that a concept will permit the design of a successful symbol (according to subsequent comprehension testing). This study examines whether ratings of the concepts of to-be-designed symbols could be useful in the prediction of comprehension of the ensuing symbols for those concepts. Participants rated 50 text descriptions (referent plus further verbal context) on: (1) how concrete is this concept? (2) how easy is it to visualize this concept?; and (3) how effective would a simple picture be in conveying this concept? These ratings served as predictors of the population estimates and open-ended comprehension scores obtained from previous research by Young and Wogalter (2001).

RESULTS showed that there was a high correlation between the measures used in this study with both population estimates and open-ended comprehension scores. Ease of visualization of a concept had the highest predictive value with concreteness, being the second highest predictor. Measures of the ease of visualization or imaging a concept may be useful preliminary tools for pictorial designers.

Language: en