ISO 9186-1:2014 — Graphical symbols — Test methods — Part 1¶
International Organization for Standardization. (2014). ISO 9186-1:2014 — Graphical symbols — Test methods — Part 1: Method for testing comprehensibility.
Cited by¶
4 citations across 4 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Mechanisms¶
- Pictogram Prototyping
- Formal comprehension testing along these lines is standard practice for public-information symbols.
This sourceSpecifies a standardized method for testing the comprehensibility of public-information graphical symbols.
- Formal comprehension testing along these lines is standard practice for public-information symbols.
- Safety Symbol Standard
- Comprehension is not assumed; standardized comprehension trials measure whether the intended workers actually read each symbol as its hazard.
This sourceDefines standardized comprehensibility testing to measure whether intended users correctly understand a safety symbol’s intended message.
- Comprehension is not assumed; standardized comprehension trials measure whether the intended workers actually read each symbol as its hazard.
- Semiotic Audience Test
- For public information symbols this is a codified practice: the ISO 9186 method for testing graphical-symbol comprehension is essentially this protocol standardized.
This sourceCodifies a standardized method for testing whether a graphical symbol communicates its intended message to the relevant audience.
- For public information symbols this is a codified practice: the ISO 9186 method for testing graphical-symbol comprehension is essentially this protocol standardized.
- Signage Comprehension Test
- Standardized methods exist for exactly this, such as ISO 9186,
This sourceSpecifies a standardized respondent test for measuring whether graphical symbols communicate their intended messages.
- Standardized methods exist for exactly this, such as ISO 9186,
Verification¶
Does it exist? Not checked yet. This entry carries no identifier to resolve. It was extracted from the citation as written in the article, normalized, and deduplicated against the rest of the registry.
Does it back the claim? Not recorded. Neither this nor any other of the 4 citations of this work carries a recorded support check.
Was it audited? Yes. A second, independent pass read the citation against the article text and recorded a verdict.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:493bc052e8b8 · see in the full table