• DocumentCode
    2294229
  • Title

    Readers´ preference for process graphics over outcome graphics accompanying assembly instructions

  • Author

    Sharp, D. Michael

  • Author_Institution
    Dept. of Language, Literature, & Commun., Rensselaer Polytech. Inst., Troy, NY, USA
  • fYear
    2003
  • fDate
    21-24 Sept. 2003
  • Abstract
    We propose that graphics that accompany procedural instructions divide into two categories, namely outcome graphics and process graphics. By using think-aloud protocol, the following questions were asked: 1. Can readers tell the difference between graphical types?; and 2. Do readers prefer one graphical type over another if they are given a choice? With this study we could be able to collect information about what readers want and do not want when they read instructions (n=25). From think-aloud data, 72% of subjects indicated they recognized a difference between outcome graphics and process graphics. Eighty percent of subjects preferred process graphics to outcome graphics. With the study we could also examine subjects´ vocalized reasons for their graphical preferences, as well as reading behaviors and vocalized metareading information. Finally, we suggest improvements in the study´s method, as well as other ways to continue research that involves outcome graphics and process graphics.
  • Keywords
    assembling; engineering graphics; technical presentation; user manuals; assembly instruction; graphical preference; outcome graphics; procedural instruction; process graphics; reader preference; reading behavior; think-aloud data; think-aloud protocol; vocalized metareading information; Assembly; Fingers; Graphics; Human factors; Production; Professional communication; Shape; Switches;
  • fLanguage
    English
  • Publisher
    ieee
  • Conference_Titel
    Professional Communication Conference, 2003. IPCC 2003. Proceedings. IEEE International
  • Print_ISBN
    0-7803-7949-7
  • Type

    conf

  • DOI
    10.1109/IPCC.2003.1245505
  • Filename
    1245505