Measuring icon complexity: An automated analysis

Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers

Volumn 35, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 334-342

  Forsythe, Alex ^a   Sheehy, Noel ^a   Sawey, Martin ^a  

^a QUEEN'S UNIVERSITY BELFAST   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER INTERFACE; COMPUTER PROGRAM; HUMAN; IMAGE PROCESSING; INFORMATION PROCESSING; INSTRUMENTATION; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; LANGUAGE; LINGUISTICS; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; METHODOLOGY; PATTERN RECOGNITION; SYMBOLISM; VISION;

AUTOMATIC DATA PROCESSING; COMMUNICATION; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; LANGUAGE; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PSYCHOLINGUISTICS; SOFTWARE; SYMBOLISM; USER-COMPUTER INTERFACE; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 0041475856     PISSN: 07433808     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03202562     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. ALARIO, F.-X., & FERRAND, L. (1999). A set of 400 pictures standardized for French: Norms for name agreement, image agreement, familiarity, visual complexity, image variability, and age of acquisition. Behavior Research Methods, instruments, & Computers, 31, 531-552.
2. AREND, U., MUTHIG, K.-F, & WANDMACHER, J. (1987). Evidence for global feature superiority in menu selection by icons. Behaviour & Information Technology, 6, 411-426.
3. BECK, J., GRAHAM, N., & SUTTER, A. (1991). Lightness differences and the perceived segregation of regions and populations. Perception & Psychophysics, 49, 257-269.
4. BIEDERMAN, I., & JU, G. (1988). Surface versus edge-based determinants of visual recognition. Cognitive Psychology, 20, 38-64.
5. BOUCART, M., & HUMPHREYS, G. W. (1992). Global shape cannot be attended without object identification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 18, 785-806.
6. BOUCART, M., & HUMPHREYS, G. W. (1995). Automatic access to object identity: Attention to global information, not to particular physical dimensions, is important. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 211, 584-601.
7. BOUCART, M., & HUMPHREYS, G. W. (1997). Integration of physical and semantic information in object processing. Perception, 26, 1197-1209.
8. BRUYAS, M. P., LE BRETON, B., & PAUZIE, A. (1998). Ergonomic guidelines for the design of pictorial information. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 21, 407-413.
9. CHRIST, R. E. (1977, October). Four years of color research for visual displays. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 21st Annual Meeting. San Francisco.
10. DAVIES, S., HAINES, H., NORRIS, B., & WILSON, J. R. (1998). Safety pictograms: Are they getting the message across? Applied Ergonomics, 21, 15-23.
11. EASTERBY, R., & ZWAGA, H. (1984). Information design: The design and evaluation of signs and printed material. New York: Wiley.
12. FENK, A. (1998). Symbols and icons in diagrammatic representation. Pragmatics & Cognition, 6, 301-334.
13. GARCIA, M., BADRE, A. N., & STASKO, J. T. (1994). Development and validation of icons varying in their abstractness. Interacting With Computers, 6, 191-211.
14. GIANNINI, A. J., GIANNINI, J. N., & CONDON, M. (2000). Use of tangential visual symbols to increase the long-term learning processes: Applications of linkage in teaching pharmacological principles of addiction. Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 40, 708-712.
15. GUASTELLO, S. J., & TKAUT, M. (1989). Verbal versus pictorial representations of objects in a human-computer interface. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 31, 99-120.
16. HARBER, R. N., & HERSHENSON, M. (1973). The psychology of visual perception. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
17. HARWERTH, R. S., & LEVI, D. M. (1978). Reaction time as a measure of suprathreshold grating detection. Vision Research, 18, 1579-1586.
18. HOCHBERG, J. E. (1968). Perception (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
19. HOCHBERG, J. E., & BROOKS, V. (1960). The psychophysics of form: Reversible perspective drawings of spatial objects. American Journal of Psychology, 73, 337-354.
20. HOEGER, R. (1997). Speed of processing and stimulus complexity in low-frequency and high-frequency channels. Perception, 26, 1039-1045.
21. HORTON, W. (1994). The icon book. Visual symbols for computer systems and documentation. New York: Wiley.
22. HUMMEL, J. E., & BIEDERMAN, I. (1992). Dynamic binding in a neural network for shape recognition. Psychological Review, 99, 480-517.
23. INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR STANDARDIZATION (1995). Road Vehicles-Symbols for controls, indicators and tell-tales (ISO 2575). Geneva: Author.
24. INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR STANDARDIZATION (2000a). Information technology - User system interfaces and symbols - Icon symbols and functions: Part I. Icons - General (ISO/IEC 11581-1). Geneva: Author.
25. INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR STANDARDIZATION (2000b). Information technology - User system interfaces and symbols - Icon symbols and functions: Part 2. Object icons (ISO/IEC 11581-2). Geneva: Author.
26. INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR STANDARDIZATION (2000c). Information technology - User system interfaces and symbols - Icon symbols and functions: Part 3. Pointer icons (ISO/IEC 11581-3). Geneva: Author.
27. INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR STANDARDIZATION (2000d). Information technology - User system interfaces and symbols - Icon symbols and functions: Part 6. Action icons (ISO/IEC 11581-6). Geneva: Author.
28. LINDGAARD, G., CHESSARI, J., & IHSEN, E. (1987). Icons in telecommunications: What makes pictorial information comprehensible to the user? Australian Telecommunication Research, 21, 17-29.
29. MAGUIRE, M. C. (1985). A review of human factors guidelines and techniques for the design of graphical human-computer interfaces. Computer & Graphics, 9, 221-235.
30. MATHWORKS (2001). Image Processing Toolbox, user's guide Version 3. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
31. McDOUGALL, S. J. P., CURRY, M. B., & DE BRUIJN, O. (1999). Measuring symbol and icon characteristics: Norms for concreteness, complexity, meaningfulness, familiarity, and semantic distance for 239 symbols. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 31, 487-519.
32. McDOUGALL, S. J. P., DE BRUIJN, O., & CURRY, M. B. (2000). Exploring the effects of icon characteristics on user performance: The role of icon concreteness, complexity and distinctiveness. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 6, 291-306.
33. MEAD, M., & MODLEY, R. (1968). Communications among all people, everywhere. Natural History, 77, 56-63.
34. MUTER, P., & MAYSON, C. (1986). The role of graphics in item selection from menus. Behaviour & Information Technology, 5, 89-95.
35. NEISSER, U., & BECKLEN, R. (1975). Selective looking: Attending to visually specified events. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 480-494.
36. NIELSEN, J. (1993). Noncommand user interfaces. Communications of the ACM, 36, 83-99.
37. OSTERGAARD, A. L., & DAVIDOFF, J. B. (1985). Some effects of color on naming and recognition of objects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 11, 579-587.
38. PARKER, D. M., LISHMAN, J. R., & HUGHES, J. (1997). Integration of spatial information in human vision is temporally anisotropic: Evidence from a spatiotemporal discrimination task, Perception, 26, 1169-1180.
39. PELLEGRINO, J. W., ROSINSKI, R. R., CHIESI, H. L., & SIEGEL, A. (1977). Picture-word differences in decision latency: An analysis of single and dual memory models. Memory & Cognition, 5, 383-396.
40. PIAMONET, D. P. T., ABEYSEKERA, J. D. A., & OHLSSON, K. (2001). Understanding small graphical symbols: A cross-cultural study. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 27, 399-404.
41. RAEDER, G. (1985). A survey of current graphical programming techniques. IEEE Computer, 18, 11-25.
42. ROGERS, Y., & OBORNE, D. J. (1987). Pictorial communication of abstract verbs in relation to human computer interaction. British Journal of Psychology, 78, 99-112.
43. SANFELIU, M. C., & FERNANDEZ, A. (1996). A set of 254 Snodgrass-Vanderwart pictures standardized for Spanish: Norms for name agreement, image agreement, familiarity, and visual complexity. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 28, 537-555.
44. SCHWARTZ, N. H., & PHILLIPPE, A. E. (1991). Individual differences in the retention of maps. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 16, 171-182.
45. SNODGRASS. J. G., & VANDERWART, M. (1980). A standardized set of 260 pictures. Norms for name agreement, image agreement, familiarity and visual complexity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning & Memory, 6, 174-215.
46. STANDING, L. (1973). Learning 10,000 pictures. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 25, 207-222.
47. SUTTER, A., BECK, J., & GRAHAM, N. (1989). Contrast and spatial variables in texture segregation: Testing a simple spatial-frequency channels model. Perception & Psychophysics, 46, 312-332.
48. TREISMAN, A. (1986, November). Features and objects in visual processing. Scientific American, 255, 114B-125.
49. TREISMAN, A., & GELADE, G. (1980). A feature integration theory of attention. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 97-136.
50. TREISMAN, A., & SOUTHER, J. (1985). Search asymmetry: A diagnostic preattentive processing of separable features. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 114, 285-310.
51. TULLIS, T. S. (1981). An evaluation of alphanumeric, graphic, and color information displays. Human Factors, 23, 541-550.
52. VASSILEV, A., & MITOV, D. (1976). Perceptual time and spatial frequency. Vision Research, 16, 89-92.
53. WALKER, R. E., NICOLAY, R. C., & STEARNS, C. R. (1965). Comparative accuracy of recognizing American and international road signs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 49, 322-325.
54. WANDMACHER, J., & AREND, U. (1985). Superiority of global features in classification and matching. Psychological Research, 47, 143-157.