Advancing Icon Design for Global Non Verbal Communication: Or What Does the Word Bow Mean?

Visible Language, 2006 by Zender, Mike

ABSTRACT

Written language is limited in effectiveness to those who can read. Verbal language is effective only for those who understand the particular language being spoken. But everyone, except those with obvious visual impairment, can effectively perceive images without regard for literacy or language. For decades these realities have suggested the promise of a universal visual language but with little real result. The occasional Olympic event sign or restroom door sign are state of the art for global non-verbal communication. While icon design has evolved little since the 1970's, the world has moved on. Increasing economic globalization and the expansion of global communication networks have made it easier to deliver messages and more important to do so, while science has advanced understanding of perception and cognition establishing principles only speculated about in the 1970's. The dream of using images to greatly facilitate global communication persists. Unfortunately, image based communication is not currently well enough informed by principles of effectiveness to attempt such a project.

To address this problem a team of researchers assembled at the University of Cincinnati to explore the development of advanced techniques for global non-verbal or image based communication. The team explored novel approaches and identified several principles designed to expand icon based communication so that it can communicate more complex messages and more abstract concepts with greater specificity than previously.

bow

What does the word "bow"mean? Several things, but the most accurate answer is it depends on the context.

To illustrate:

shoe | bow

ship | bow

arrow | bow

rain | bow

take a | bow

bow | down

IN EACH OF THE ABOVE PAIRS SOMETHING SPARKS a different meaning for the single typographic sign: "bow." That something is simply another sign, a context. In some pairs the context sparks a meaning that is only subtly different, no doubt in homage to the vagaries of linguistic etymology, but in other instances the context spotlights a meaning that is a different part of speech altogether, a verb instead of a noun for example. In each case context is what illumines the meaning (Wittgenstein. 1961 [1921]). This is as true for sentences and stories as it is for words (Wright, 1992). Unfortunately, written language though rich in context is limited in effectiveness to those who can read. Even verbal language is effective only for those who understand the particular language being spoken. But everyone, except those with obvious visual impairment, can understand images without regard for literacy or language. Donis A. Dondis even goes so far as to claim "Among illiterate constituencies, visual communi cation's effectiveness is undisputed"(Dondis, 1973). From street signs to Olympic venues, images communicate where words fail.

What exactly does the icon of a man mean? Again, it appears to depend in part on the context:

street sign I human icon

park sign I human icon

airport door sign I human icon

(left to right Figure 1 below)

The visual changes in the human icons are minimal and fairly subtle yet, in their context, viewers from all over the world have 'read' these icons as meaning specific and very different things: a crosswalk, a hiking trail, a restroom. In a park context adding two additional strokes to the man icon suggests a backpack and walking stick. The park context combined with two immediate iconic clues redefine the 'crosswalk' icon to a hiking trail icon. Like words, the overall context of the human icon changes its meaning. This is an impressive transformation accomplished with an economy of means.

However, as successful as these icons are in their contexts, they are not as comprehensive or as definitive as words. The system from which the hiking icon came has no icon for 'pleasant hiking trail' or 'difficult hiking trail' or even 'dangerous hiking trail.' Complex messages that include specific modifiers or actions or states of being are not generally communicated in current icon systems. One standard icon system, published by the American Institute of Graphic Arts (AlGA) and United States Department of Transportation (US DOT), consists of fifty icons. That's a good number but it's not enough of a vocabulary for communicating complex messages. More comprehensive attempts at developing universal systems of communication such as Isotype and Esperanto, are widely regarded as having failed (Lupton, 1989). Apparently the sophisticated role context plays in linguistic communication has not been successfully duplicated in visual communication.

How can the inadequacies of communicating with icons be overcome? What role does context play in causing a viewer to read a 'walking man' icon as 'crosswalk' not 'hiking trail?' Would placing the restroom man icon on the yellow background of a street sign context change the reading (figure 2)? How much of any reading change that results from the new context is learned? Is any part of altered meaning, the color yellow for example, a change that is integral to human perception and cognition rather than learned? How do more abstract elements, such as the rectangular containing shape standing on its corner and the linear border, interact with the more literal element of the man icon to suggest meaning? How can the icon be refined to express complex messages such as abstract concepts, states of being or processes? These are some of the questions addressed by the research on which this paper reports.