Design of pictograms: a comparison between iterative and non-iterative design methodologies
In this paper we investigate the extent to which iterative and non-iterative design procedures, when conducted by designers without expertise in Ergonomics, are able to generate meaningful pictograms. For this purpose 2 methodologies, used to design pictograms, were compared according to productivity and efficacy. This research had used data from a real project that had the aim to design 24 pictograms for forestal context. The iterative design condition was referred to as Production Group (PG) and the non-iterative was labeled as Individual Production (IP). The pictograms were then evaluated according to their comprehensibility through a Comprehensibility Judgment Test. Results showed that the PG condition had produced the top ranking pictograms (regarding the comprehensibility estimation) 9 times (37.50％) against 5 times (20.83％) of the IP condition and a tied result had occurred 10 times (41.66％). The estimated comprehensibility average of the PG was 37.14％ and the IP was 35.42％. According to the t-Student test the difference between the 2 groups means was not statistically significant (p-value=0.491). The results suggest that an iterative procedure to design pictograms could not be cost-effective if the team lacks expertise in Ergonomics and User-Centered-Design methodologies and is not prepared to take advantage of the participants contribution.
Duarte, M. E. C. Rosa, C. Rebelo, F. Duarte, C.
Ergonomics Laboratory. FMH | Technical University of Lisbon. Estrada da Costa. 1499-002 Cruz IADE | IADE | UNIDCOM – Research Unit of Design and Communication / Design School of IADE. Av. D. Carlos I, Ergonomics Laboratory. FMH | Technical University of Lisbon. Estrada da Costa. 1499-002 Cruz Quebrad
国际会议
17th World Congress on Ergonomics(第十七届国际人类工效学大会)
北京
英文
1-7
2009-08-09（万方平台首次上网日期，不代表论文的发表时间）