public information symbols : a comparison of iso testing prcedures author: christof brugger repot:...
TRANSCRIPT
Public information symbols : a comparison of ISO testing prcedu
res
Author: Christof Brugger
Repot: Yang Kun, Ou
Introduction
• Technical committee 145 of the ISO has been working on improving the introduction of comprehensible public information sybmols since the beginning of the 1970s (ISO 致力改善 )
Introduction
• Responses from subsequent comprehension /recognition testing in four or more countries are categorized by three independently working judges using the seven categories
Response categories for the evaluation
• Category Criterion– 1 Correct understanding of the symbol is certain
– 2 Correct understand of the symbol is likely
– 3 Correct understand of the symbol is marginally likely
– 4 The response is opposite to the intended meaning
– 5 The response is wrong
– 6 The response given is Don’t Know
– 7 No response is given
Appropriateness ranking test
• Respondents– 50 位受測者 (28 male, 22 female)– 15-78 years (M=34)– The experiments were collected data in the Vi
enna, Austria
Method
• Stimuli– symbol were used stimuli for figure 1– Displayed in black and white on an A7-sized c
ard– In center position with a size of 30mmx30mm
Figure 1: Test symbols
Procedure
• A respondent had to rank, successively of the symbol
• The respondent was asked to read the information card
• Spread all the test cards on a table, and to rank-order the variants according to their appropriateness for the particular referent
Scoring
• The median ranking positions in accordance with ISO 9186 were determined for each symbol
• The median values for each referent were transformed into normalized values (100 is best, and 0 is worst)
Appropriateness class assignment test
• Respondents– 67 位受測者 (34 men, and 33 women)– Average age was 32 years
• Stimuli– 與實驗一相同
Procedure
• As in the appropriateness ranking test all cards for one referent were handed over in a stack with the information card on top ( 疊在手上一張一張問 )
• Respondent one of three classes of appropriateness– Highly appropriate– Slightly appropriate– Not appropriate
Scoring
• According to the proposed method, the frequency of class 1 assignments of a variant (highly appropriate) was used as a measure of its appropriateness
Comprehensibility estimation
• Respondents– 51 位受測者 (22 man, and 29 women)– Average age was 33 years
• Stimuli– Referent was 30mmx30mm in black and white,
arranged in a circle on an A4-sized page
Procedure
• The respondents were instructed to read the information in the centre of each page
• Write next to each symbol and estimation of the percentage of the Austrian population that, in their opinion, would understand its meaning
• Scoring– The mean estimation score was computed for each
symbol
Comprehension text
• Respondents– 311 位受測者 (198 man, and 113 women)
• Stimuli– Size of 30mmx30mm were made on A7-sized pages– One symbol per page– First page used for registering age and sex– Second page was instruction sheet– Third page showed an example
Procedure
• Write below each symbol his or her interpretation of the meaning
• No information about context
• Respondent never had to give the meaning for more than one symbol variant for a specific referent
scoring
• As specified by ISO 9186 each answer was assigned to one of seven possible categories by three independently working judges
• In the cases where the judges did not agree on one single category, the category assigned by the majority of the judges was chosen
scoring
• The comprehension score is derived from the percentages of responses in categories 1 to 3
Results and discussion
• Use Friedman tests and subseqently to Wilcoxon signed-rank tests
• Significant differences were found within all sets (P<0.01)
• The relation between the two rating tasks and the ranking task be colser (r=0.82) than the relation between the rating tasks and the ranking task (r=0.49, 0.70)
Results and discussion
• Correlations of the rating scores with comprehension scores were highly significant with r=0.51 for appropriateness class assignment means and r=0.76 for comprehensibility estimation
Conclusions
• ISO has therefore decided that this test will not be a part of the future standard testing procedure and to use the comprehensibility estimation test instead