3º Congresso Brasileiro de Pesquisa e Desenvolvimento em Design

PUC-RJ — Rio de Janeiro (RJ)

Novembro/1998

Conferências

Research and Development in Information Design

Resumo

My major interest is in the design and use ofwamings, but as the theme for this present talk I would like to consider the problems associated with wamings as a more general instance of an often-occurring problem in design-that ofhow to refine a design. product whose primary aim is to communicate information. l'm referring here to such things as brochures, financiai reports, forms, instruction manuais and the like. Although ali design products communicate in some way, these particular twodimensional design products have as the central part oftheir raison d'être a communication brief.

Referências bibliográficas

  • Adams, A. S. 1998. The role and methodology ofusabilitytesting in information design. In: H. Zwaga, T. Boersema & H. Hounhout (Eds.), Visual informationfor Everyday Use: Design and Research. London: Taylor & Francis.
  • Adams, A. S., Bochner, S. & Bilik, L. 1998. The effectiveness ofwaming signs in hazardous work places: Cognitive and social determinants. Applied Ergonomics, 29, 247-254.
  • ANSI Z535 .1-5. 1997. Suíte of standards on safety signs and colours. American National Standards Institute.
  • AS 1319-1994. Safety signs for the occupational environment, Sydney: Standards Australia.
  • AS 2342-1992, Development, Testing and lmplementation oflnformation and Safety Symbols and Symbolic Signs, Sydney: Standards Australia.
  • Ayres, T. J., Gross, M. M., Wood, C. T., Horst, D. P., Beyer, R. R. and Robinson, J. N. 1988. What is a waming and when will it work? Proceedings of the Human Factors Society-33rd Annual Meeting, 426-430.
  • Easterby, R. S. and Hakiel, S. R. 1977. Safety labelling and consumerproducts: Field studies ofsign recognition. AP Report 76, Applied Psychology Department, University of Aston in Birmingham.
  • Edworthy, J. & Adams, A. S. 1996. Warnings: A research prospective. London: Taylor & Francis.
  • HazPak: A practical guide to basic risk management. Undated. WorkCover New South Wales, 400 Kent Street, Sydney NSW 2000, Australia.
  • Hubbard-Hall Chemical Co v Silverman, 340 F2d 402,405 (1st cir 1965).
  • ISO 9186-1989, Procedures forthe Development and Testing ofPublic lnformation Symbols, Geneva: Intemational Organisation for Standardisation (Note: A revision is in preparation).
  • Laughery, K. R., Wogalter, M. S. and Young, S. L. (1994). Humanfactors perspectiVes on warnings. Santa Monica: The Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
  • McCarthy, R. L., Ayres, T. J., Wood, C. T. and Robinson, J. N. (1995). Risk and effectiveness criteria for using on-product wamings. Ergonomics, 38, 2164-2175.
  • Perloff, R. (1993). Third-person e:ffect research 1983-1992: A review and synthesis' lnternational Journal ofPublic Opinion Research, 5, 167-184
  • Virzi, R.· A. (1992). Refining the test phase of usability evaluation: How many subjects is enough? Human Factors, 34, 457-468.