Design Factors Affecting the Reaction Time for Identifying Toilet Signs: A Preliminary Study

Abstract

This study focused on the manner in which design factors affect the reaction time for identifying toilet signs. Taiwanese university students and staff members (50 men, 50 women; M age = 23.5 year, SD = 5.7) participated in the study. The 36 toilet signs were modified on three factors (six presenting styles, two figure-ground exchanges, and three colors), and the reaction time data of all participants were collected when the signs were presented in a simulation onscreen. Participants were quickest when reading Chinese text, followed by graphics and English texts. The findings also showed that men and women had different reaction times across various design combinations. These findings can serve as a reference for practically designing toilet signs, since design factors can lead to difficulties with comprehension based on reaction time measurements.

Keywords

toilet signs reaction time gender difference

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Alluisi

Warm

(1990) Things that go together: A review of stimulus response compatibility and related effects. Advances in Psychology 65: 3–30.

Baber

Wankling

(1992) An experimental comparison of text and symbols for in-car reconfigurable displays. Applied Ergonomics 23: 255–262.

Ben-Bassat

Shinar

(2006) Ergonomic guidelines for traffic sign design increase sign comprehension. Human Factors 48: 182–195.

Boneau

Cole

J. L.

(1967) Decision theory, the pigeon, and the psychophysical function. Psychological Review 74: 123.

Chi

C. F.

Dewi

R. S.

(2014) Matching performance of vehicle icons in graphical and textual formats. Applied Ergonomics 45: 904–916.

Crow

(2003) Visible signs, New York, NY: AVA Publishing.

Dewar

R. E.

Ells

J. G.

Mundy

(1976) Reaction time as an index of traffic sign perception. Human Factors 18: 381–392.

Fitts

P. M.

(1951) Engineering psychology and equipment design. In: Steven

S. S.

(ed) Handbook of experimental psychology, New York, NY: Wiley, pp. 1287–1340.

Fitts

P. M.

Seeger

C. M.

(1953) S-R compatibility: Spatial characteristics of stimulus and response codes. Journal of Experimental Psychology 46: 199.

10.

Huang, Y. T. (2012). Classification and utility analysis of restroom signs (Master dissertation). New Taipei, Taiwan: Mingchi University of Technology.

11.

Liu

Y. C.

C. H.

(2012) The effects of age on symbol comprehension in central rail hubs in Taiwan. Applied Ergonomics 43: 1016–1025.

12.

Nevin

J. A.

(1969) Signal detection theory and operant behavior: A review of David M. Green and John A. Swets' signal detection theory and psychophysics. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 12: 475–480.

13.

A. W.

Chan

A. H.

(2008) The effects of driver factors and sign design features on the comprehensibility of traffic signs. Journal of Safety Research 39: 321–328.

14.

Sie, C. C. (2011). Analyses of legibility in different combined toilet signs (Master dissertation). New Taipei, Taiwan: Mingchi University of Technology.

15.

Simon

(1990) The effects of an irrelevant directional cue on human information processing. Advances in Psychology 65: 31–86.

16.

Stotts

D. B.

(1998) The usefulness of icons on the computer interface: Effect of graphical abstraction and functional representation on experienced and novice users. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting 42: 453–457.

17.

Wiedenbeck

(1999) The use of icons and labels in an end user application program: An empirical study of learning and retention. Behaviour & Information Technology 18: 68–82.

18.

Young

S. L.

Wogalter

M. S.

(1990) Comprehension and memory of instruction manual warnings: Conspicuous print and pictorial icons. Human Factors 32: 637–649.

19.

Zwaga, H. J. G., & Easterby, R. S. (1984). Developing effective symbols for public information. In R.S. Easterby, & H.J.G. Zwaga (Eds.), Information design: The design and evaluation of signs and printed material (pp. 277–297). New York: J Wiley & Son.