Evaluation of driver comprehension of word versus symbol highway signs

Alternative Information Signs: Evaluation of Driver Comprehension and Visual Attention

“…This result was also confirmed by Plummer et al (1974). Plummer et al tested two groups of 10 subjects on their understanding of the symbol signs and corresponding word signs for ten warning signs.…”

The development and evaluation of effective symbol signs

“…As Bralnard et al (1961) had noted, the best understood signs were those with direct counterparts in U.S. signage or those which were direct pictorial representations of the hazards.…”

“…In another assessment of glance legibility, Plummer, Minarch, and King (1974) compared the reaction time and accuracy of response to symbol and word signs for 20 subjects. Using a tachistoscope , they presented black and white slides of 10 symbol and 10 word messages for 200 s or more.…”

“…In situations in which word signs perform better than symbols (Dewar & Ells, 1974), the addition of visual distraction and loading tasks,an addition which makes the test situation more like the real world results in superior performance for symbols (Ells & Dewar, 1976). In addition, the accuracy of symbol identification is greater than for comparable word signs (King, 1971(King, , 1975Plummer et al . , 1974) particularly if interference is added.…”

“…These "production" studies provide valuable insight into the stereotypes that exist for specific concepts. Brainard et al (1961), Green (1979), and Lerner and Collins (1980) all found that subjects can draw images for a particular referent and that there are common stereotypes for many of the referents. Furthermore, these images were often more accurately identified than a set of standardized images by a subsequent group of subjects (Green, 1979).…”