Research Report 1202 AD

00 ~~~

t~

u.

INTERNATIONAL ROAD SIGNS:

INTERPRETABILITY AND TRAINING

TECHNIQUES

Douglas Griffith

and

~ >uu, Tomme R. Actkinson H

ARI FIELD UNIT AT FORT HOOD, TEXAS

t L ~~

U. S. Army

Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences

September 1978

Approved for public release; distribution unlum ,tpd.

_______ i

i IIl4
U. S. ARMY RESEARCH INSTITUTE

FOR T HE BE HAVIORAL AN D SOCIAL SCI ENC ES

A Field Operating A gency under t he Jurisdiction of the

Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel

WILLIAM L. HAUSER

JOSEPH ZEIDNER Colonel, US Army

Technical Director (Desi gnate) Commander

NOTICES

DISTRIBUTION Primary distribution of this report h.t been made by ARI . Please address corre spondence

concerning distribution of reports to: U. S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral end Social Sciences . ATTN PERI.P , 5001 Eisenh~~w, Avenue. Alexandria , Virginia 22333

FINAL DISPOSITION This report may be destroyed when it is no longer needed. Pies,, do not return it to

tM U. S. Army Ruearch Institute for thi Bah.vior.l end Social Sciences.

~QJj, The findings in this report are not to be construed as an official Department of th, Army position ,

unliss so designated by Other auth orised documents.

_______ 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ .~~~~~~~~~ .~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ___
Unclassified SECURITY CLASS IFICATION OF THIS PAGE (Wbai Ow. Ent.r.~~

REPflDT FIArIIM IJTATIflIJ PA’

~

E READ INSTRUCTIONS I I BEFORE COMPLETIN G FORM

IT AEPORT NUMBER 2. GOVT ACCESSION NO. 3. RECIPIENT’S CATALOG NUMBER

Research Report 1202

4. TITLE (aid Subtiti.) 5. TYPE OF REPORT & PERIOO COVERED

INTERNATIONAL ROAD SIGNS : INTERPRETABTLITY --

AND TRAINING TECHNIQUES -___________________________

6. PERFORMING ORG. REPORT NUMBER

7. AUTHOR(S) 5. CONTRACT OR GRANT PIUMBERI .)

Douglas Griffith and Tomme R. Actkinson --

9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAM E AND ADDRESS $0. PROGRAM ELEMENT. PROJECT . TASK AREA 6 WORK UNIT NUMBERS

U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral

and Social Sciences, 5001 Eisenhower Avenue 2Q763743A775

Alexandria , VA 22333 ___________________________

II. CONTROLLING OFFICE NAME AND ADDRESS 12. REPORT DATE

TRADOC COMBINED ARM S TEST ACTIVITY September 1978 ~~~

Fort Hood , TX 76544 13. NUMBER OF PAGES

______________________________________________________ 48

ra. MONITORING AGENCY NAME a ADDRESS(I1 di lf.rsnt from Controilin~ Office) $5. SECURITY CLASS. (of this ,.port)

—— 

Unclassified

5.. DECLASSIFICATION /DOWNGRADING SCHEDULE

16. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of this Report)

Approved for public release; distribution unlimited.

$7. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of the sb.tract wt.r.d In Block 20, If dlff ., ent from Report)

IL SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

IC. KEY WORDS (Continu, on revere. sid e If nec•es r3 aid identify by block number)

Driver training

Symbol interpretability

20. ~

ABSTRA CT (Continue me roe.,. , sid, If n.c..sa~’ aid td.ntlfy by block number)

~The drivers in a battalion about to be deployed to Germany were taught the

meanings of international road signs using one of the following techniques :

Sign Only , in which the road signs were presented via a slide projector and

the names of the slides were provided orally by the instructor; Sign Elaboration , which was identical to the Sign Only condition except that a mnemonic

cue was provided to facilitate retention of the sign ’s meaning ; and a Standard Control condition , in which a lecture presentation was supplemented with — ‘

DO ~~~~~~~~~~~ 

~

473 EDITION OF f NOV 6S IS OSSOLE1E Unc ’ - - •ified SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF tIl lS PAGE (WIla, Oat. Ents,.d)

_________ _______ ___ 

L.I

~~~~~
Unclassified

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE(Wha, Data Eniered)

20.

\standard training aids. No significant differences were obtained in the

performances of the groups. The analyses of the interpretability of individual signs indicated that there was good reason to question the in—

terpretability of many international road signs . Apparently, the more

abstract the symbolic representation , the lower the interpretability.

Training should stress selective instructional strategies for the more

abstract signs and have a longer instruction period.

~Tl$ WI~

;tj ~~~~~ Buf? ~

.x1J

~ a

a - _ _

__________ I

~

LL

Unclassified

SECURITY CLA SSIFICATION OF THIS PAGEIWII O Data Entered)

- .
( ?‘—~ / i ,, - - — ..

Rsssarch Nspsrtl2O2 . 

,

t - -

-i

( INTERNATIONALJOAD~ IGNS:

JNTERPRETABILITY AND TRAINING i

’

TECHNIQUES.

-

, Douglas/Griffith

Tomme R.!Actkinson

ARI FIELD UNIT AT FORT HOOD, TEXAS

Submitted as complete and Approved By:

technically accurate, by:

George M. Gividen A.H. Birnbaum, Acting Director

Field Unit Chief ORGANIZATIONS AND SYSTEMS

RESEARCH LABORATORY

- / Joseph Zeidner

TECHNICAL DIRECTOR (DESIGNATE)

U.S. ARMY RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR THE BEHAVIORAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCES

5001 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria , Virginia 22333

Office, Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel

Department of the Army

Sept 

~~~~~~ 

/ ~ ~~~~: 

~~:

Army Project Number Human Performance in

2Q763743A775 Field Assessment

Appraesd for pubf ,c release; distribution unlimited.

_ _
ARI Research Reports and Technical Papers are intended for sponsors of

R&D tasks and other research and military agencies. Any findings ready for

implementation at the time of publication are presented in the latter part of

the Brief. Upon completion of a major phase of the task, formal recommen~ dations for official action normally are conveyed to appropriate military

agencies by briefing or Disposition Form.

_____ .

~~~ .- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
- - -

FOREWORD

A primary mission of the Fort Hood Field Unit of the Army Research

Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences CARl), under Army project 2Q763743A775 , is to provide technical advisory services to local

units. As a part of Brigade ‘75 , units were routinely rotated from Fort

Hood to USAREUR. The drivers in these units were required to obtain

driver ’s licenses in Germany so that they could legally operate their

vehicles. Half the driver ’s test was a test on international road signs.

Because drivers were having difficulty passing this portion of the

driver ’s test, the commander of the 2/67th Armor Battalion (2d AD) requested that ARI investigate the problem.

The study presented in this research report was conducted in response to that request. The results are pertinent to all commanders confronted with the problem of training on international road signs.

chnical Director (Designate ) 

-

~~~~‘~~~ -~~~ ~~

- - - -- 

~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~

.-.el -~~~~~ ..k ~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~.. .

~~~~~~~ ,- - - . .-- -

.

INTERNATIONAL ROAD SIGNS : INTERPRETABILITY AND TRAINING TECHNIQUES

BRIEF

Requirement:

To evaluate the effectiveness of alternat ive techniques for training military drivers about to be deployed to Germany in the meaning of

international road signs and to assess the interpretability of the international road signs used in Germany .

Procedure :

Two innovative instructional techniques employing slide presenta— -

tion of road signs were used during normally scheduled classes. One

technique (Sign Only) presented slides of individual road signs at a

10 seconds/slide rate with oral identification by the instructor . The

second technique (Sign Elaboration) used the same procedure except that

a mnemonic cue was provided to aid recognition of the sign. These two

experimental techniques were compared with a standard instructional procedure (Standard Control condition) in which typical Army lesson plans

were employed. Two measures were used to assess the relative effectiveness of the three training techniques. One measure was the number of

signs correctly recognized during training . The second measure was the

number of road signs correctly recognized on a criterion test administered approximately 1 week after training. The interpretability of the

signs was assessed by determining the percentage of personnel who missed

each road sign during training and by determining the percentage of personnel who missed each road sign presented during criterion testing .

Findings:

No significant differences emerged between the two slide presentation conditions during training, nor were significant differences ohtam ed among the three conditions during criterion testing. Given that

the percentages of errors on criterion testing were 9.0, 11.2, and 13.9

for the Sign Elaboration , Sign Only , and Standard Control conditions,

respectively, it was concluded that these three training techniques

were deficient.

_ . .
The percentage of personnel missing a given sign ranged from 0

to 86% during the training phase. Ten of the 128 signs were missed

by more than half the personnel in at least one of the conditions.

Interpretability appeared to be an inverse function of abstraction ,

i.e., the more abstract the pictorial representation , the lower the

interpretability.

Utilization of Findings:

Road sign instruction for military drivers deployed or about to

be deployed overseas will be more effective if selective instructional

strategies are used to teach the more difficult abstract signs .

________ _
-- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

INTERNATIONAL ROAD SIGNS : INTERPRETABILITY AND TRAINING TECHNIQUES

CONTENTS

Page

INTRODUCTION 1

OBJECTIVES 1

METHOD 1

RESULTS 2

CONCLUSION S 2

TECHNICAL SUPPLEMENT

BACKGROUND 5

METHOD 6

Presentation and Test Materials 6

Procedures 6

Design and Subjects 7

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 8

Training Techniques 8

Interpretability 8

REFERENCES 11

APPENDIX A. LISTING OF MNEMONIC CUES 13

B. RANK ORDERING OF ROAD SIGNS MISSED DURING

TRAINING 25

C. RANK ORDERING OF ROAD SIGNS MOST FREQUENTLY

MISSED DURING CRITERION TESTING 43

DISTRIBUTION 47

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Performance by condition during training and

criterion testing 3 

-

~~~~~~~ --- -.

-

-

- 

----~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
______ - - - - —-----_ ,~~._——--- .—. ______________________

INTERNATIONAL ROAD SIGNS: INTERPRETABILITY AND TRAINING TECHNIQUES

INTROD UCTION

Military drivers frequently must drive in foreign countries. International road signs are used in many countries and extensively

throughout Europe. Accordingly , an understanding of these road signs

is important for drivers operating overseas. Pictorial symbols are used

in international road signs in an effort to transcend language barriers.

Presumably, these symbols are readily interpreted , regardless of the

drive~~~ cultural background. A variety of studies have attested to

the high interpretability of international road signs and the general

superiority of symbols to words. But in spite of special training on

international road signs, military drivers were failing the road sign

portion of European drivers’ tests. The present research examines this

problem .

OBJECTIVE S

Two objectives were central to the present research:

1. To evaluate the effectiveness of alternative instructional

techniques for teaching international road signs; and

2. To assess the interpretability of individual international

road signs .

METHOD

Army drivers in the 2/67th Armor Battalion about to be deployed to

Germany served as the experimental subjects. The experimental conditions were Sign Only , Sign Elaboration , and Standard Control condi tion .

The Standard Control condition , which used the typical lecture

format supplemented with training aids , was regarded as the baseline

condition.

The Sign Only condition involved a visual slide presentation of

road signs along with oral naming of the sign. In addition , a study

test procedure was used during training that tested the driver ’s recognition of the meaning of the signs after he had been given an oppor—

tunity to study the sign. The comparison of the Sign Only condition

with the Standard Control condition allowed the assessment of the ef—

fects of systematic audiovisual presentation that required the active

participation of the students.

1 

-- -- ---,- -- - .- - --.~~~~~~~~~~~~~ .--- . -~~~ .---
The Sign Elaboration condition was identical to the Sign Only condition except that a memory cue was provided to enhance the recognition

of the meaning of the sign. The memory cue was a particular characteristic of the road sign (e.g., for “Au tobahn Detour ,” “

. . . concentrate on

the U in the sign. Think of the U detouring you around something .”).

The comparison of the Sign Elaboration condition with the Sign Only condition allowed the assessment of the effects of systematic mnemonic

elaboration to road sign training. The experiment used 128 signs.

RESULTS

Although there was a very small advantage during training for the

Sign Elaboration group and a slightly larger advantage of both the experimental conditions over the Standard Control condition on the criterion test (see Figure 1), data analyses showed that the experimental

techniques were not necessarily more effective than the standard instructional technique . The differences may have been due to spurious

and unrelated factors.

Perhaps of more use to the trainer are the data relating to the

signs missed most frequently . In general, the more readily recognized

road signs fell into two categories: (a) signs having direct counterparts in the United States (e.g., STOP), and (b) signs using direct

pictorial representations (e.g., low—flying aircraft).

CONCLUSIONS

Wi th respect to the initial objectives of this research , two basic

conclusions emerged : (a) the obtained differences among the alterna tive

instructional programs were not significant statistically , and (b ) there

is reason to question the ready interpretability of many international

road signs.

Although the two innovative training techn iques did not necessarily

result in significant increments in performance , it was still concluded

that techniques can be developed that would help drivers learn and retain the meanings of road signs. It was quite clear that 2 hours of

instruction is inadequate for effective road sign training . Pending

f urther research , it is recommended tha t a minimum of 4 hours be devoted

to this subject. As a result of the limitations in training time and

available resources, the experimenters were skeptical at the outset that

effect ive training techniques could be developed under the preva iling

conditions. However , given what was learned in the presen t experimen t

in addition to more training resources , it is thought that cost—effective

training techn iques could be developed if fur ther research were to be

conducted on the topic of road sign training . Such research would help

to develop theories of cognition as well as more effective training programs. The problem of learning and remembering pictogram meanings has

rece ived scant atten tion in the psycholog ical literature .

2

_ _
r ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 

-

(.5

i- I-- — C’,

~~~~~~~~~

~~~~~ ~~~~~p 

h

U, 

H ‘-4Q11 (S I- C’) ~~ ~~ cZ~ — I- _J ~~ LU LU

L)

LU

0.

U)

(SJ LL) a) V)Q~~~ LU

(S

-4

UC c

Q d c’.J

3 

-

~~~~~~~-. -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ --— .~~~~~~-- .-
As an interim strategy, however , it is recommended that a selective training strategy be adopted , particularly for the more troublesome signs. Although personnel should be at least familiarized with

all the signs, training should be concentrated on the more difficult

signs. By adopting this training strategy , it is thought that performance can be enhanced significantly.

4
—-.-—.

- - ---- ~— -— . .~~~~~~ --- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -..-. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

TECHNICAL SUPPLEMENT

BACKGROUND

A review of the literature on symbology indicated that there has

been some difficulty in developing pictorial symbols that are readily

interpretable. Cahill (1975) and Kolers (1969) have each commented on

the difficulty of developing a universal symbology and on the need for

empirical research to develop a symbology based on psychologically realistic principles. These conclusions, taken together with the difficulties experienced by military drivers being rotated to Europe, were legitimate reasons to question the interpretability of international road

signs.

Training presented an interesting problem . According to the current memory literature (e.g., Paivio, 1971), memory for pictures is

superior to memory for words. In fact, most techniques for mnemonic

enhancement involve transforming verbal codes into visual codes. However , in the case of international road signs we begin with pictorial

symbols , i.e., visual codes. These visual codes are useless , however ,

if they are not linked to the semantic representation of their meaning.

The current memory literature offered little to suggest how to

train individuals in the meaning of international road signs. Although

the literature amply demonstrated that visual elaboration enhanced verbal

recall , there were no empirical demonstrations of the mnemonic enhance—

ment of pictorial materials.

At least one theoretical idea in the literatur e appeared to offer

some promise . This idea is termed “depth or spread of processing”

(Craik & Lockhart, 1972; Craik & Tulving, 1975). The basic point is

that memory is enhanced when codes are progressively elaborated to a

semantic level of analysis. In the case of international road signs,

the problem is to elaborate the pictorial representation of the sign so

that it is linked with its semantic representation in memory .

One condition was developed in an attempt to elaborate the road

signs mnemonically. Termed the Sign Elaboration condition , it was designed to elaborate mentally the pictorial representation and to link

this pictorial representation with its underlying semantic interpretation. For example, for the sign “Autobahn Detour ,” the following mnemonic cue was provided : “. . . concentrate on the U in the sign . Think

of the U detouring you around something .”

Of course , it was possible that the systematic presentation entailed by the Sign Elaboration condition , coupled with the active participation of the subjects during training, would result in mnemonic

enhancement . It was also possible that the mnemonic cues would be a

5

~

-- --.- -— 
hindrance rather than an aid; and that, perhaps , idiosyncratic mediators

developed by individuals would be more helpful than those supplied by

the experimenters. Accordingly , the Sign Only condition was developed.

In this condition , the instructor presented the signs in the same way as

in the Sign Elaboration condition but did not discuss them.

The traditional method of platform instruction supplemented with

training aids was also included in the study as a baseline condition .

This was called the Standard Control condition.

METHOD

Presentation and Test Materials

Slides showing the international road signs were prepared from

ANNEX A of USAREUR Pam 190-34. Directly below each road sign was a

unique number, identical to that in the pamphlet. A total of 128 slides

was prepared; these were distributed among four slide trays. Two sets

of slides were arranged in each tray , one for presentation and one for

testing. A separate answer sheet prepared for each tray included only

the signs presented in that tray . The response alternatives were alphabetized . A slide projector and screen were used for presentation .

A subset of 50 of the same 128 slides was employed during criterion

testing . The 50 response alternatives were not alphabetized on the

answer sheet during criterion testing.

Procedures

Training Phase. During the training phase in the Sign Elaboration

and Sign Only conditions , the slides of the individual road signs were

presented at a 10-sec/slide rate. During this 10—second presentation

interval, the instructor named the road sign , provided mnemonic elaboration in the Sign Elaboration condition (see Appendix A for a listing of

the mnemonic cues provided in the Sign Elaboration condition), and said

the name of the sign again. In the Sign Only condition , the instructor

spoke the name of the sign twice. Slides were presented in numerical

order.

During testing , the slides were presented at a 20—sec/slide rate

in random order with the restriction that each sign be tested only once.

Subjects were required to write the slide number adjacent to the correct

alternative on their answer sheets. Immediately after the answer sheets

were handed in , a brief feedback trial was provided. All slides in the

tray were shown again in the initial presentation order and their correct

names provided. The same procedure was followed for each of the four

slide trays , with a short break between the second and third trays. The

total instructional session was just under 2 hours.

6

_____
rI-- - -- “

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

- 

~~~~~

—-

~~

-

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

- —

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

.

In the Standard Control condition , the individual instructors

developed their own lesson plans according to standard procedures.

Basically, the classes consisted of a standard platform presentation

supplemented with training aids.

Criterion Testing. The criterion test was the road sign section

of the international driver ’s test , a routine part of pre-deployment

testing, which was administered approximately 1 week after training.

Initially , each road sign was presented at a 30-sec/slide rate. Again ,

subjects were asked to write the number of the slide adjacent to the

correct alternative on the answer sheet. After the first iteration , all

slides were shown a second time at the rate of 15 sec/slide .

Design and Subjects

The subjects were the drivers assigned to the 2/67th Armor Battalion

stationed at Fort Hood , Tex. The battalion was preparing to deploy to

Germany as part of Brigade ‘75.

The three conditions of the research design were the Sign Elaboration , Sign Only , and Standard Control conditions. The regularly scheduled instructors were employed in the Sign Elaboration and Sign Only

conditions , and they conducted classes in the manner described above.

Assignment to condition was on the basis of the normally scheduled

classes. The numbers of different classes were four for Sign Elaboration , three for Sign Only , and six for Standard Control. An effort was

made to counterbalance the presentation order of the four slide trays in

the Sign Elaboration and Sign Only conditions.

Assignment of classes to conditions was random within the constraints of scheduling resources. One class was lost from the Sign Only

condition as a result of an equipment failure. The number of drivers

for which data were collected during the training phase was 90 for the

Sign Elaboration condition and 50 for the Sign Only condition . The number of drivers present for the criterion test was 75 , 38 , and 117 for

the Sign Elaboration , Sign Only, and Standard Control conditions ,

respectively.

The discrepancies in n ’ s between train ing and the criterion test

are attributable to no—show s and missing data collection forms. Strictly

speaking, the sampling unit for this study was the class and not the in—

dividual driver. It will be noted in the statistical analyses that follow , however , that the individual driver was employed as the sampling

unit. This assumption was made to increase the statistical power of the

test. The reader will also note , however , that the same conclusions

would be reached regardless of the sampling unit.

7
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Training Techniques

No significant differences emerged during training between the Sign

Elaboration and Sign Only conditions , t(l38) = — .00, p < .05. The Sign

Elaboration group missed 18.5% of the signs during training , whereas the

Sign Only group missed 17.5% of the signs. No data were collected during

training for the Standard Control condition .

On the criterion test , a one—way unweighted means analysis of variance did not reveal a significant effect; F(2, 227) = 2.21, p < .05. The

mean percentages incorrect were 9.0%, 11.2%, and 13.9% for the Sign Elaboration, Sign Only , and Standard Control conditions , respectively.

Clearly , even instruction using mnemonic enhancement of sign materials was not completely successful . It cannot be concluded from the

present data, however , that the basic approach to the mnemonic enhancement of sign materials is untenable. First of all, it is clear that the

time programed for road sign instruction was inadequate . Perhaps no

program limited to a 2-hour instructional block would have worked. Multiple presentations and testings may be necessary . The overall quality

of the mnemonic cues may have been poor. The entire study was developed

on short notice , and it was difficult to develop the mediators in the

time available. Perhaps with better mnemonic cues a substantial effect

would have been obtained.

Another possible approach would be to teach the subjects the strategy of sign elaboration , but to require the subjects to generate their

own idiosyncratic mediators for each sign . Data indicate that subjectgenerated mediators are superior to experimenter-supplied mediators with

respect to recall (Bobrow & Bower, 1969; Griffith , 1976). With the exception of having the subjects generate their own mediators , the literature offers little else in the way of suggesting techniques for the mnemonic enhancement of sign materials .

Interpretability

The data on the individual road signs are presented in Appendixes

B and C. With these interpretability data , it will be useful to keep

two considerations in mind. One consideration is the context dependency

of the data. To a certain extent, these data are a function of their

respective testing situations. It was possible for an individual to

miss a sign , even though he might have understood the basic meaning of

the sign , because there were alternatives with similar meanings on the

answer sheet (e.g., one-way traffic and one-way street).

8 

-...- -~~~~~~~~~~ -.

~~ ------ -—-
The second consideration is the environmental validity of the testitig situation . It is quite obvious that when people are driving and see

a sign they do not consult an answer sheet to find the correct alternative. Hence, they are not likely to be confused by similar alternatives .

By the same token , however , when driving they are required not to recognize but to recall the meaning of the sign, and typically they have much

less than 20 seconds to respond appropriately . Thus, it is important

when examining the interpretability data not to take the reported values

literally.

To a certain extent, the data are a function of the testing situation. They do not necessarily indicate the percentage of drivers who

would respond appropriately when confronted by the sign on the highway .

Nevertheless, these considerations do not detract from the basic thrus t

of the interpretability data: There is reason to question seriously the

general interpretability of international road signs. Moreover , these

considerations do not question the general rank ordering of the signs in

terms of interpretability.

The percentage of personnel missing a given sign varied from 0% to

86% during the training phase. Ten of the 128 signs were missed by more

than half the personnel in at least one of the conditions. It is important to realize that these drivers were not entirely naive with respect

to international road signs. Some drivers had held licenses in Europe

previously , and study aids were available to all outside the formal

classroom setting . Nevertheless , substantial numbers of road signs were

being missed. These findings take exception to the conclusions of

Brainard , Campbell, and E].kin (1961), that international road signs are

highly interpretable and that their interpretability approaches 100%

after one exposure to the meanings of the signs.

Although we disagree with certain conclusions of Brainard et al.

(1961), we esentially agree with their analysis of the nature of road

sign difficulty. A subjective analysis of the interpretability data by

the authors indicated that the most readily interpreted signs fell into

two categories. Not surprisingly , one category consisted of those signs

having direct counterparts in existing American signs (e.g., STOP). The

second category consisted of signs using direct pictorial representations

(e.g., low—flying aircraft). As a general rule , it appeared that the

more abstract the pictorial representation ,.the lower the interpretability.

9 

.-~~~~~~
- - -. .—-. ----- ----.—- - -,-- . —-. .-- . -

~

-

~~~ . .-...—-— -——-—-.—-— — — ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 

__ -r’—-___ - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -

REFERENCES

Bobrow , S. A., & Bower , G. H. Comprehension and Recall of Sentences .

Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1969 , 80 , 455—461.

Brainard , R. W., Campbell , R. J., & Elkin , E. H. Design and Interpretability of Road Signs . Journal of Applied Psychology, 1961, 45 ,

130— 136.

Cahill , M. C. Interpretability of Graphic Symbols as a Function of

Context and Experience Factors. Journal of Applied Psychology,

1975 , 60, 376—380.

Craik , F. I. M., & Lockhart , R. S. Levels of Processing : A framework

for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1972, 11, 671— 884.

Craik , F. I. M., & Tulving, E. Depth of Processing and the Retention

of Words in Episodic Memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology :

Gene ral, 1975 , 104 , 268—294.

Griffith , D. The Attentional Demands of Mnemonic Control Processes.

Memory and Cognition, 1976 , 4 , 103—108.

Kolers, P. A. Some Formal Characteristics of Pictograms . American

Scientist, 1969, 57 , 348—363..

Paivio , A. Imagery and Verbal Processes. New York : Molt , Rinehart ,

and Winston , Inc., 1971.

--

~~ ---—~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

-----—— - ---. —

,

~~~~~

,.

,

C~D~

U~ P1~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~ .: 

- -

.

11 - ~~

—- 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
~ rr-r--- — -- - — -_----

APPENDIX A

LI STING OF MNEMONIC CUES

LIST 1

1. STOP — read the sign. It’s identical to that employed in the States.

2. Halt - Halt means the same as STOP .

3. Danger - Both the exclamation point and the triangular shape mean

danger.

4. Danger - Both the exclamation point and the triangular shape mean

danger and the word underneath tells what kind of danger (Strassenbahn

means Streetcar) .

5. Danger — Although they forgot the dot for the exclamation point, the

sign still means danger.

6. Temporary “Go ” Sign - This is a manually operated sign to control

traffic at construction sites. Concentrate on the green color. It

means go.

7. Yield Right—of—Way - The shape of the sign is identical to the same

sign in the States. The differences are that the sign is not yellow and

does not say “yield.”

8. Dangerous Downgrade — The triangular shape means danger—-watch out.

The downward slope indicates that the road slopes downward and the 10

percent indicates a 10 percent grade.

9. Dangerous Upgrade - The triangular shape means watch out--danger.

The upward slope indicates that the road slopes upward , and the 12 percent indicates a 12 percent grade.

10. Oncoming Traffic - The triangular shape means watch out. The opposing arrows indicate traffic approaching from opposite directions.

11. Road Narrows - The triangular shape means watch out; the closing

lines indicate that the road narrows.

12. Road Narrows - The triangular shape means watch out; thU closing

line on the right indicates that the right side of the road narrows .

13. Crossroads - The triangular shape means watch out; and the crossing

lines indicate what to watch out for--a crossroad ahead.

13 ‘ PRZC~D1NG ~~~~ kLA~~

- .

~

_ - - _ . ~~~_ - ~~~~~~~~~—“---- .-

~~~~~~~~ --_--- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-- ~~~~~ - .——~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ——-- -

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 

- _ - _

a

14. Drawbridge Ahead - The triangular shape means watch out ; and the

picture of the drawbridge tells you what to watch out for--a drawbridge .

15. Wild Animal Crossing - The triangular shape means watch out; and

the picture tells you what to watch out for--a deer , a wild animal crossing the road.

16. Domestic Animal Crossing - The triangular shape means watch out; and

the picture of the cow tells you what to watch out for.

17. Single Curve - The triangular shape means watch out; and the line

curving to the right indicates the direction of the road ahead.

18. Double Curve - The triangular shape means watch out; and the line

indicates that the road curves first to the right and then to the left.

19. Curve or Winding Road - The triangular shape means watch out; and

the curving, winding line indicates--what else?--a curving , winding road.

20. Rough Road - The triangular shape means watch out; and the two bumps

indicate a bumpy road.

21. Slippery Road - The triangular shape means watch out; and the car,

which is apparently in trouble, has skidded on a slippery road .

22. Construction Site - The triangular shape means watch out; and the

picture of a man working indicates what you should watch out for--a construction site.

23. Danger of Falling Rocks - The triangular shape means watch out; and

the picture tells you what to watch out for--falling rocks.

24. Quay or River Bank - The triangular shape means watch out; and the

picture of the car falling into the water indicates that you, too , should

be careful of driving off the road into a body of water.

25. Traffic Lights — The triangular shape means “be aware” and the red,

amber , and green lights indicate that there is a traffic light ahead.

26. Low—Flying Aircraft — The triangular shape means look out; and the

picture tells you that it is low—flying aircraft which you should look

out for.

27. Side Wind - The triangular shape means look out; and the picture

tells you what to look out for. In case you don ’t recognize the picture ,

it is a picture of a wind sock and it indicates that there is the danger

of a side wind.

28. Children - The triangular shape means watch out; and the picture

indicates you are to watch out for children .

14 
———~~~—-- —~~- -.

~~~~~ --- -- ---~~~

29. Bicycle Crossing - The triangular shape means look out; and the

picture of the man on a bicycle indicates that it is a bicycle crossing.

30. Pedestrian Crosswalk - The triangular shape means look out; and the

picture of the man crossing the street indicates that it is a pedestrian

crosswalk.

31. Pedestrian Crosswalk - The triangular shape means look out; and the

picture of the man crossing the street indicates that it is a pedestrian

crosswalk.

32. Pedestrian Crosswalk - The pic~~ re~Of a man crossing the street indicates that it is a pedestrian crosswalk. This sign is posted at the

crosswalk and comes after the warning signs.

33. Pedestrian Crosswalk - The white stripes painted on the pavement

indicate that pedestrians cross here.

15

_______ -

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -~~~~~ —~~~~~~ ——~~~ - -
~~~~~~~—~-.-

~~—---~

. 

~~

- -— ~~~~~~-——~

-— —.-_ -— -

~~~~ —

LIST 2

34. Dead End - This picture represents a dead end. Think of the white

stripe as being a dead—end alley .

35. Children Playing - This sign of a child playing indicates that children are permitted to play on the roadway .

36. Streetlight Marking - This sign is printed on streetlights that do

not remain on all night. You must have your parking lights on if you

park here.

37. Guarded Railroad Crossing - The triangular shape means watch out.

The picture tells you two things. It looks like a railroad track , so

this means that you are approaching a railroad crossing . It also looks

like a gate , meaning that the railroad crossing is guarded .

38. Unguarded Railroad Crossing — The triangular shape is a warning .

The picture of the train ind icates that it is a railroad crossing and

that the crossing is unguarded.

39. Railroad Crossing - The shape of the sign is the same as the one

in the States.

40. Railroad Crossing - The shape of the sign is the same as the one in

the States. If the red light on top is flashing , it means that a train

is approaching .

41. Distance to Guarded Railroad Crossing - Same as the earlier one.

Stripes indicate the number of 80—meter intervals to the crossing .

42. Distance to Unguarded Railroad Crossing - Same as the earlier one .

Stripes indicate the number of 80—meter intervals to the crossing .

43. No Stopping - Think of this sign as a wheel , a wheel meaning go.

The X cancels “Go,” indicating no stopping on the roadway . Got that?

(If not, repeat.)

44. No Stopping on Shoulder - The sign shows a car stopped on the

shoulder of the road. The X means you shouldn ’t do this.

45. Limited No Stopping - Think of this as being half of the No Stop—

ping sign . You have only half an X. It means that you can only stop

for the p~irpose of mounting and dismounting , and loading and unloading.

46. No Parking - The P in the sign stands for parking . The slash indicates that parking is prohibited.

16

_______ _ _
- - .- - -.- ~~~~~~~ -..~~-——-.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ - -~~~~ -- 

47. No Stopping Zone - This sign contains sign 45 which indicates limited No Stopping . The rest of the sign indicates the conditions under

which parking is permitted. In this case, for 3 hours ( Stunden ) if you

have a blue permit.

17

_ —--~~~~~~~~~~ -.- . — k

~~
-—.- .—. .‘ .— - --— - - — -—- - 

. 

-

LIST 3

48. End of No Stopping Zone - This is a cancellation (note diagonal

stripes) of the No Stopping Zone sign indicating that the parking permit

is not valid beyond this sign .

49. No Passing - This circular shape indicates that something is prohibited . The picture in the sign shows you what it is--passing other

motor vehicles.

50. No Passing - The circular shape indicates that something is prohibited , and the picture shows you what it is. Trucks (in red) are not

allowed to pass.

51. No Passing - Same business-—no passing .

52. End of No Passing Zone - This is a picture of sign 49, i.e., No

Passing - The slash through the sign indicates that the previous sign

has been canceled.

53. End of No Passing Zone - This is a picture of sign 50, i.e., Trucks

cannot pass - The slash through the sign indicates that the previous sign

has been canceled .

54. End of No Passing Zone - Ende means end. This sign means that the

no passing sign has been canceled.

55. Vehicles Above a Specific Axle Weight Prohibited - The circular

sign means that something is prohibited , and the picture shows you what

it is. The 8 t means 8 tons , and the picture of the wheel axle indicates that vehicles above an 8—ton axle weight are prohibited.

56. Maximum Weigh t Allowed — The circular sign indicates that something

is prohibited . The 5.5 T stands for 51⁄2 tons and means that vehicles

above this weight will not be allowed to continue .

57. Maximum Height Allowed -The circular shape indicates that something

is prohibited. The two vertical markers indicate that it is height , and

the 3 M indicates the maximum height, in meters , of a vehicle that may

pass.

58. Maximum Width Allowed - The circular shape indicates that something

is prohibited. The horizontal markers and the 2 M indicate that vehicles

more than 2 meters wide may not pass.

59. No Vehicles Carry ing Pollutants - The circular shape indicates that

something is prohibited . Note the blue lines indicating water , the red

oval indicating pollutants and the wheels denoting a vehicle . Put this

all together, and you have no vehicles carrying pollutants.

18

__ ~~~~~~ __ - ~~~~
r ~~~~~~

-

~~

-

~~

- ---- --__.—- - __________

60. Customs Control - Think of a slot in the sign as the place you would

drop your customs tax.

61. Road Closed - Remember , circular signs usually mean that something

is prohibited. A circular sign with nothing on it means that the road

is closed , that everything is prohibited.

62. Motor Vehir’les Prohibited — The circular sign indicates that something is prohibited , and the picture shows you what it is--motor vehicles.

63. Motorcycles Prohibited - The circular sign indicates that something

is prohibited , and the picture shows you what it is-—motorcycles.

64. Motor Vehicles Prohibited on Sundays and Holidays - This sign is

similar to the motor vehicles prohibited sign . The difference is that

the drawing is not colored in. It also has a similar meaning. Motor

vehicles prohibited , but only on Sundays and Holidays.

65. Entry Prohibited - Think of the red closing in on the white , prohibiting anything from entering .

66. Speed Limit - The circular shape indicates that something is prohinited , and the 30 K M indicates that speeds greater than 30 K M are ‘ -

prohibited (i.e., the speed limit).

67. End of Speed Limit - The slash cancels the KMH speed limit.

68. End of Speed Limit - Again , the diagonal line cancels the speed

limit.

69. End of Restrictions - The multiple diagonal lines indicate that

more than one restriction is canceled.

70. One-Way Street - Similar to the States. Einbahnstrasse is German

for One-Way Street.

71. One-Way Street - Same meaning as the preceding sign .

72. Yield to Oncoming Traffic - The two arrows indicate oncoming traffic.

The red arrow indicates who must yield.

73. Oncoming Traffic Must Wait - Again, the two arrows inc icate oncoming

traffic , and the red arrow indicates who must wait.

74. One-Way Traffic - The arrow simply indicates that there is one-way

traffic and the direction of the traffic.

75. Mandatory Direction of Travel - The arrow simply means that you

must travel in the direction indicated .

19

__ ______ __
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

76. Mandatory Direction of Travel - The arrow indicates the side on

which you are to pass an obstacle.

77 . Mandatory Direction of Travel - Arrow indicates the direction in

which you must proceed .

78. Mandatory Direction of Travel - Arrows indicate the direction in

which traffic must travel.

79. Mandatory Direction of Travel - Traffic must turn left.

80. Mandatory Direction of Travel - You must turn either right or left.

81. Motor Vehicles Only - The picture indicates the type of vehicles

which are allowed on the highway, i.e., motor vehicles.

82. End of Restriction Iiiposed by Sign 81 — The diagonal cancels the

sign.

83. Bridle Path — The picture indicates a horse and rider. Only horseback riders are allowed on t~

iis path.

84. Pedestrians Only - The picture shows two pedestrians. Only pedestrians are allowed here.

85. Bicycles Only - The picture indicates a bicycle , and the sign means

that only bicycles are allowed here.

86. Priority Road — A diamond inside of another diamond indicates that

you are on a priority road . Think of the diamond as being something

important, e.g., a diamond ring , indicating the priority road .

87. Priority Road - Same as 86.

88. Priority Road - Same business.

89. Priority Road Ahead — Remember this yield sign has the same shape

as it does in the States. This sign means that you are approach ing a

priority road and must yield the right-of—way.

90. End of Priority Road — The diagonal lines through the priority road

sign cancel the priority road sign , indicating the end of the priority

road.

91. Priority Road - Remember the triangular shape means “warning .” The

wavy arrow indicates you are in a priority road. The horizontal line

indicates that you have the right-of-way only at the next intersection.

92. Detour - Umleitung is German for Detour. Concentrate on the U.

Imagine the U detouring you around something.

20

L - 

_ _ _____ 

_ _
93. Bypass Routing - The sign indicates an alternative route. The

5.5 T stands for 51⁄2 tons and indicates that vehicles greater than this

weight must take the alternative route.

94. Truck Route - The picture of the truck indicates a truck route.

The arrows show the directio’n in which trucks must travel.

95. City Limits - A rectangular sign with the name of a city on it and

Kreis Ahrweiler means the city limits.

96. End of City Limits - The same sign with a red slash through it indicates the end of the city limits.

97. Direction Marker - City names wi th arrows by them point to the

direction of the cities.

98. European Highway — The E stands for European , and the number denotes

the number of the route.

99. Federal Highway Number - Simply denotes the number of the highway

you are using.

100. Place Number — Signs of this shape simply indicate the name of a ‘

place.

21
- —~~~ - . - - - ~~~~~~~--- -- - -

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

LIST 4

101. Direction of the Autobahn - Two parallel white lines crossed by a

bridge indicate the autobahn. This sign points the direction to the

nearest autobahn entrance . The name in the sign is the name of the terminal city.

102. Autobahn Entrance — Einfahrt means entrance ; concentrate on the

second and third letters , which spell “in .”

103. End of Autobahn - Remember that the parallel white lines with the

bridge crossing them is the sign for the Autobahn . This same sign with

the diagonal red slash indicates the end of the Autobahn .

104. Autobahn Direction Sign - Shows direction on the Autobahn .

105. Change of Traffic Lanes - The arrows indicate where you must cross.

106. Detour Route Marker - Concentrate on the U in the sign. Think of

the U detouring you around something .

— 107. Autobahn Detour — Concentrate on the U in the sign . Think of the

U detouring you around something .

108. Police — Polizei is German for Police . It looks quite similar to

the English word. The 200 m stands for 200 meters--the distance to th~ nearest police station .

109. Telephone — The picture of the telephone receiver ind icates there

is a telephone ahead. 200 m , 200 meters , gives you the distance .

110. First Aid Station — The red cross stands for first aid. A first

aid station is ahead.

111. Recommended Speed - The kin should tell you that this is a speed

limit. Note that a speed range is indicated. This is a recommended

speed .

112. Water Protection Area - Note the oil truck and the water. This is

a water protection area.

113. Parking Area - The P stands for parking . This is a parking area.

114. Parking on Curb Permitted - No te the P which stands for parking

and the picture of the car parked on the curb. This indicates that parking on the curb is permitted.

115. Sof t Shoulder - Note the picture of the car sunk in the sof t

shoulder. This warns you of a soft shoulder.

22
116. Compulsory Minimum Speed - Remember that the circular shape m di—

cates that this is a regulation. The number indicates the minimum speed

in KPM which you are required to travel.

117. End of Compulsory Minimum Speed Zone - The diagonal slash indicates

cancellation. In this case, it is canceling the minimum speed limit.

118. Directional Arrows - These arrows indicate directions just as they

would in the States.

119. Solid White Line - Indicates no passing . In Germany , a solid

single line means the same as a solid double line in the States.

120. Broken White Line — Means the same as it does in the States.

121. Solid and Broken White Line — Means the same as it does in the States.

122. Bus Stop - Think of the H as meaning Halt or Stop, and imagine a

bus the shape of the sign . This is the sign for a bus stop.

123. Streetcar Stop — Think of the H as meaning Malt or Stop. Let the

circular shape remind you of streetcar wheels. This sign is for a

streetcar stop.

124. No Parking - Think of the broken lines as representing what might

happen to your car if you park in a No Parking Zone.

125. Direction Marker - The arrows point the way to whatever is written

on them.

126. Traffic Directed by School Guard - Concentrate on the picture. It

tells you exactly what the sign means.

127. Snow Chains Mandatory — The circular shape of the sign means that

it’s a regulation , and the picture indicates exactly what the regulation

is.

128. Taxi Parking Only - Remember that the circular sign with one slash

through it indicates no stopping or parking . The word Taxi indicates

that taxis are excepted , that this parking is for taxis only.

129. Taxi Parking Only - Same as sign 131, except that Droschken is the

German word for Taxi.

23

~
_ -. ~- ‘ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ - .‘r’ ~~~~~ — -. —

AP PENDIX B

RANK ORDERING OF ROAD SIGNS MISSED DURING TRAINING

Sign Sign

Onl~

y Elaboration

1. No Stopping Zone 64 86

3 Siund.n

2. Limited No Stopping 62 74

3. Priority Road Ahead hI~~~~~! 74 56

r

4. One-Way Traffic 

~. 

- 62 68

5. Detour Route Marker 62 63

6. Autobahn Detour 62 62

4
Sign Sign

Only Elaboration

7. Direction to Autobahn I 60 46

8. Roads Closed 60 41

9. End of City Limits ____________ 54 52

10. Direction Marker 32 53

11 . No Stopping 48 52

12. Autobahn Direction Sign 48 48

13. End of No Stopping Zone 48 48

14. Yield to Oncoming Traffic 32 47 ©

26

L. ~~~ --- -

~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ - -

~~

.- .- ---

~~~~~

- - - - -

~~~~~~~

-

~~~

-----_

Sign Sign

Only Elaboration p

15. Entry Prohibited 40 44

~1

16. Oncoming Traffic Must Wait 22 41

17. Autobahn Entrance 34 36

18. Streetli ght Marking 28 36

19. Priority Road 34 29

20. Priority Road 

0

34 29

21. Priority Road 

0

34 29

22. Priority Road 34 29

A

27

___ _ ____ _ _
: -

Sign Sign Only Elaboration

23. Di rection Marker __________ 

14 34

24. End of Restrictions 30 33

25. Maximum We ight Allowed 32 28

26. Guarded Railroad Crossing 

©

22 32

27. Reconinended Speed 22 31 

~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~

28. Compulsory Minimum Speed 30 29

29. Unguarded Railroad Crossing 26 30

28

_ _ ___ 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sign Sign

Only El aboration

30. Motor Vehicl es Prohibited 30 21

31. Detour 20 30

32. Bypass Routing 14 28

UI.

33. Distance to Unguarded Railroad

Cross ing 20 27

34. End of Priority Road 26 21

35. End of Motor Vehicl e Only -

Restriction 18 26

36. Chan9e of Traffic Lanes _______ 14 24

29

Li __ _________ ___
37 . Curve or Winding Road 

38. Motor Vehicles Prohibited on 

Sundays or Holidays 

39. Vehicles Above a Certain Axle 

Weight Prohibited 

40. Directional Arrows 

41. Double Curve 

42 . Distance to Guarded Railroad 

Crossing 

43 . Maximum Width Allowed 

30 

Sign Sign ~ Elaboration 

22 23 

20 23 

14 

22 21 

20 22 

16 22 

22 12 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 

-- - - - - - -

Sign Sign Only El aborati on

44. No Veh icles Carrying Pollutants 12 22

45. End of Autobahn 22 9

46. Place Name _____ 

18 21

47. Customs Control 16 21

_

48. No Parking k 16 20

49. Maximum Height Allowed 20 14

50. European Highway 

©

14 20

51. Yield Right of Way 20 12

31
_______________ -

Sign Sign Only Elaboration

52. Motor Vehicles Only ~~~~~~ 

20 11

53. Mandatory Di rection of Travel 19 16

54. Mandatory Direction of Travel 19 16

55. Mandatory Di rection of Travel 19 16

56. Mandatory Direction of Travel 19 16

57. Mandatory Di rection of Travel 19 16

58. Mandatory Direction of Travel 19 16

32
Sign Sign

Only Elaboration

59. End of No Passing Zone 14 19

60. End of No Passing Zon€ 14 19

61. End of No Passing ZonE 14 19

Tiud.

62. No Parking 12 19

63. One Way Street ~~~ ~~~~ 

18 17

I Ei~

aOstiak ~

64. One Way Street 18 17

65. Federal Highway Marker 14 17

66. Broken White Line 12 17

33
— — —~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 

,.

~~~—~

— —— ._ --

Sign Sign

Only Elaboration

61. SIngle Curve 12 17

68. City Limi ts 12 16

R..ag.n

Kr .is Ahrw.ik,

69. Railroad Crossing 7 16

70. Railroad Crossing 7 16

71. Side Wind 16 4

72. No Passing 

A

13 15

73. No Passing 13 15

34

___
- - — - - - - ~~~~~~~~ - - -- — 

Sign Sign

____ 

El aboration

74. No Pass i ng 13 15

75. End of Compulson Minimum _

~~

_

~

p -

Speed Zone 12 13

76. Streetcar Stop ~~~~~~ — 12 12

77. Dangerous Downgrade 12 9

78. Pedestrians Only 12 9

79. Crossroads 12 8

80. Rough Road 

A

12

35
___________ -

.

Sign Sign

Only Elaboration

81. Speed Limit 6 12

82. Temporary Go Sign 12 2

A

83. Taxi Parking Only 11 11

84. Taxi Parking Only - 11 11

0

85. End of Speed Limit 10 11

86. End of Speed Limit 8 11

87. Children 

0

10 10

A

36

-- - 4 -- - - - - - - -~~~~-—-- - - ----~ _ --- _ —-- _ -

-~~~~~~ ---- -- - -------
Sign Sign Only Elabora tion

88. Dangerous Upgrade 10 9

89. Bus Stop 6 10

90. Road Narrows 

4l11! ~I: ::~

1IIIIh 

10 6

91. Solid White Line 10 6

92. Danger 

I 10 5

93. No Stopping on Shoulder 

A

8 8

94 Dead End 8 7

95. SolId Broken WM te

_

~

1

~~

___

~~

__

~

i

~~~~~~~~~~

_ _ _ _ _

~

_ _ _

~~

_ _ _ 

8
Sign Sign Only El aboration

96. Domestic Animal Crossing 8 4

97. Halt 2 8

98. Parking on Curb Peniiitted 4 7

99. Bridle Path 2 7

100. Oncoming Traffic 2 7

101. Truc k Route 

~

I-- 

~~ 

II:::::’ 8

102. WIld An imal Crossing 6 1

38

-- -

—-----__-- --- -—- -_ - -—-.-- ~~~~_ - - ------- -- _ --- --~~~~~~~~ ---~~~~~
- -

I!

Sign Sign

Only El aboration

103. Sli ppery Road 6 1

104. Pedestrian Crosswalk 5 4

1 05. Pedestrian Crosswalk ~ 5 4

A-- -

106. Pedestrian Crosswal k 5 4

107. Pedestrian Crosswalk - -- 5 4

108. Danger 4

ST1ASSENB!

~

!

~ II

109. Danger 4 5

39

__ ___
Sign Sign

Only Elaborat ion

110. Traffi c Directed by School Guard 4 4

111. Drawbridge Ahead 4 4

112. Shoft Shoulder

113. Traffic Lights 4 3

114. Parking Area 4 3

115. Stop .

~ 2 4

STOP]-

~~

116. Cons truction Site 4 2

40 

~~---~~~-_ ~~~_—_ --- --~~~~~~~ _ ---~~ -—~~~ -~~ -~~~----
~ - . - - - - ~ - - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ - -

Sign Sign

Only Elaboration

117. Blcyles Only -.

~‘ 4 1

11 8. Quay or River Bank 4 1

11 9. Police 4 1

P.Iizs~

120. ChIldren Playing ______ 4 0

Li~i

121. Motorcycles Prohibited 4 0

122. Danger of Falling Rocks 

0

2 3

123. Snow Chains Mandatory 

a

2 2

124. Water Protection Area 2 2

41 

- _ - - - - -- --- - ------ -- -- - —--------- - - -- -- - ~~~~~~~~ -~~~-
Sign Sign Only Elaboration

125. Telephone 2 2

126. Bicycle Crossing 2 0

127. First Aid Station 0 1

+

128. Low Flying Aircraft 0 0

A

42

__ _ ___
APPENDIX C

RANK ORDERING OF ROAD SIGNS MOST FREQUENTLY MISSED

DURING CRITERION TESTING

Sign Only Sign Elaboration Standard

1. One-Way Street 32 21 30

2. Bicycle Crossing 18 20 31

3. Entry Prohibited 24 19 29

4. Street Car Stop 13 24 29

5. ChIldren 1 6 24 28

6. Pedestrian Only 26 27 26

7. No Stopping 16 20 26

8. Detour 26 16 22

9. Autobahn Entrance 24 20 26

10. Motor Vehicles Prohibited 13 9 26

11. Bus Stop 11 23 19

12. Bicycles Only 18 23 14

13. Autobahn Ends 13 9 23

14. Federal Highway Marker 11 5 22

15. Cross Roads 8 8 21

16. Pedestrian Crosswalk 16 16 21

17. Guarded Railroad Crossing 21 13 14

18. Maximum Weight Allowed 13 12 21

19. Double Curve 21 1 9

20. MaxImum Height Al lowed 16 11 20

43
Sign Onl~ Sign Elaboration Standard 

21. End of Speed Limit 16 11 12 

22. Dangerous Downgrade 16 4 14 

23. Children Playing 11 9 15 

24. Dead End 8 9 15 

25. Temporary Go Sign 11 4 15 

26. Danger 13 3 9 

27 . Dangerous Upgrade 3 5 13 

28. Mandatory Right or Left 

Turn 8 11 12 

29. Danger Strassenbahn 11 4 11 

30. Oncoming Traffic 8 9 11 

31. Drawbridge Ahead 11 7 4 

32. Speed Limit 8 3 11 

33. Side Wind 11 3 10 

34. Road Narrows 11 9 

35. No Passing 5 4 11 

"6 . Unguarded Railroad Crossing 5 9 10 

37. Traffic Lights 5 8 9 

38. Quay or River Bank 3 5 8 

39. First Aid Station 8 4 2 

40. Wild Animal Crossing 8 0 3 

41. Construction Site 3 6 

44 
- - -~~~~ ---- -

~~~~~ --~~~— --- -~~~~~~~~~~

~

jgn Only Sign Elaboration Standard

42. Maximum Width Al lowed 5 4 7

43. Rough Road 5 4 3

44. Telephone 5 3 3

45. Domestic Anima l Crossing 5 1 4

46. Falling Rocks 0 1 4

47. Stop 3 1 2

48. Slippery Road 3 0 3

49. Truck Route 3 1 2

50. Parking Area 3 0 2

45

_
~~~~ ____~ _ • •__~~~~~ _

~

_ -~~~~ - -— - -

DISTRIBUTION

ARI Distribution Litt

4 OASD t M&RA) 2 HQusAcDEc . Ft Ord, ATTN: Library

2 HODA (DAMI-CSZ) 1 HQUSACDEC, Ft Ord , ATTN: ATEC—EX—E—Hum Factors

1 HODA (DAPE-PBR 2 USAEEC. Ft Benjamin Harrison , ATTN: Library

1 HODA (DAMA-AR) 1 USAPACDC, Ft Benjamin Harrison , ATrN: ATCP—HR

1 HQDA (DAPE-HRE.PO) 1 USA Comm—Elect Sch, Ft Monmouth , ATTN: ATSN—EA

1 I-IQOA (SGRO-ID) 1 USAEC, Ft Monmouth , ATTN : AMSEL—CT—HDP

I HQDA (DAMI- D OT.C) 1 usAEc , Ft Monmou th , ATTN: AMSEL— PA—P

1 HODA (DAPC-PMz-A) 1 USAEC, Ft Monmouth, ATI’N: AMSEL—S l—CB

1 HQDA (DACH-PPZ-A) 1 USAEC, Ft Monmouth, ATTN: C, Fact Des Br

1 HODA (DAPE-l-f RE) I USA Materials Sys Anal Agcy, Aberdeen, ATTN: AMXSY— P

1 HQDA (DAPE-MPO-C) 1 Edgewood Arsenal, Aberdeen, ATTN: SAREA—BL—H

1 HODA (DAPE-DW) 1 USA Ord Ctr & Sch , Aberdeen , ATTN: ATSL—TEM—C

1 HODA (DAPE-HRL( 2 USA Hum Engr Lab , Aberdeen , ATTN: LibrarylDir

1 HODA (DAPE-CPS ) I USA Combat Arms Tng Bd , Ft Benning, A’TTN: Ad Supervisor

1 HODA (DAFD-MFA) 1 USA Infantry Hum Rsch Unit, Ft Benning, ATTN: Chief

1 HODA (DARC,-ARS .P) 1 USA Infantry Bd , Ft Benn ing, ATTN: STE BC—TE—T

1 HQDA (DAPC.PAS-A) 1 USASMA. Ft Bliss , ATTN: ATSS—LRC

1 HODA (DUSA-OR) 1 USA Air Def Sch , Ft Bliss , A’fl’N: ATSA—CID—ME

1 HODA (DAMO-ROR) I USA Air Dci Sch, Ft Bliss , ATTN: Tech Lib

1 HQDA (DASG) 1 USA Air Def Bd , Ft Bliss , ATTN: FILES

1 HODA (DA1O-Pil I USA Air Dci Bd, Ft Bliss, ATTN: STEBD—PO

1 Chief , Consult Div (DA-OTSG) , Adelphi, MD 1 USA Cmd & General Stf College, Ft Leavenworth , ATTN: Lib

1 Mu Asst. Hum Res , 000R&E , OAD (E&LS) I USA Cmd & General Stf College , Ft Leavenworth , ATTN: ATSW—SE—L

1 HO USARAL, APO Seattle, ATTN: ARA GP-R 1 USA Cmd & General Stf College, Ft Leavenworth, ATTN: Ed Advisor

I HO First Army, AT1’N: AFKA-OI-TI 1 USA Combined Arms Cmbt Dee Act , Ft Leavenworth , ATTN: DepCdr

2 HO Fifth Army, Ft Sam Houston 1 USA Combined Arms Cmbl Dee Act , Ft Leavenworth, ATTN: CCS

1 Dir , Army Sd Studies Ofc , ATTN: OAVCSA (DSP ) I USA Combined Arms Cmbt De~ Act , Ft Leavenworth , ATIN: ATCASA

1 Ofc Chief of Stf, Studies Ofc 1 USA Combined Arms Cmbt Dee Act, Ft Leavenworth, ATTN: ATCACO—E

1 DCSPER , ATTN: CP$/OCP 1 USA Combined Arms Cnibt Dee Act , Ft Leavenworth , ATTN: ATCACC—C l

1 The Army Lib, Pentagon, A fl ’N: RSB Chief 1 USAECOM. Night Vision Lab, Ft Belvoir , ATTN~ AMSEL—NV—SD

1 The Army Lib. Pentagon, ATTN: ANRAL 3 USA Computer Sys Cmd, Ft Belvoir , ATTN: Tech Library

1 Ofc, Asst Sect of the Army (R&D) 1 USAMERDC. Ft Belvoir . ATTN: STSFB—DO

I Tech Support Olc, OJCS 1 USA Eng Sch, Ft Belvoir, ATTN: Library

1 USASA, Arlington, ATTN: IARD-T I USA Topographic Lab, Ft Belvoir , ATTN: ETL—TD—S

1 USA Rsch Ofc , Durham, ATTN: Life Sciences Dir 1 USA Topographic Lab. Ft Belvoir , ATTN: STINFO Center

2 USARIEM , Natick , ATTN: SGRD-UE-CA 1 USA Topographic Lab. Ft Belvoir, A’T’TN: ETL—GSL

1 USATTC, Ft Clayton, A’fl’N: STETC-MO-A I USA Intelligence Ctr & Sch, Ft Huachuca, ATTN: CTD—MS

1 USAIMA , Ft Bragg, ATTN: ATSU-CTD-OM 1 USA Intelligence Ctr & Sch, Ft Huachuca, ATTN: ATS—CTD—MS

I USAIMA , Ft Bragg, ATTN: Merquat Lib 1 USA Intelligence Ctr & Sch , Ft Huachuca , ATTN: ATSI—TE

1 US WAC Ctr & Sch, Ft McClellan , ATI’N: Lib 1 USA Intelligence Ctr & Sch, Ft Huachuca , AT1’N: ATSI—TEX— GS

I US WAC Ctr & Sch, Ft McClellan, ATTN: Tng Dir I USA Intelligence Ctr & Sch, Ft Huachuca, A’fl’N: ATSI—CTS—O R

1 USA Quartermaster Sch, Ft Lee, ATTN : ATSM-TE I USA Intelligence Ctr & Sch, Ft Huachuca, ATTN: ATS I—CTD—DT

1 Intelligence Material Dcv Ofc , EWL , Ft Holabird 1 USA Intelligence Ctr & Sch, Ft Huachuca , ATTN: ATSI—CTD—cS

1 USA SE Signal Sch, Ft Gordon, A’fl’N: ATSO-EA 1 USA Intelligence Ctr & Sch, Ft Huachuca , A1’TN: DAS/SRD

1 USA Chaplain Ctr & Sch, Ft Hamilton, ATTN: ATSC.TE.RD I USA Intelligence Ctr & Sch, Ft Huachuca , AT1’N: ATS I—TEM

1 USATSCH. Ft Eustis , A’fl’N: Educ Advisor 1 USA Intelligence Ctr & Sch, Ft Huachuca , ATTN: Library

I USA War College, Carlisle Barracks, ATTN: Lib 1 CDR , HO Ft Huachuca. ATTN: Tech Ref Div

2 WRAIR . Neuropsychiatry Div 2 CDR, USA Electronic Prvg Grd, ATTN: STEEP—MT—S

1 DLI, SDA, Monterey 1 COR , Project MASSTER . ATTN: Tech Info Center

I USA Concept Anal Agcy. Bethesda, ATTN: MOCA-WGC 1 Hq MASSTER , USATRADOC, LNO

1 USA Concept Anal Agcy . Bethesda . ATTN: MOCA-MR 1 Research Institute , HQ MASSTER , Ft Hood

I USA Concept Anal Agcy, Bethesda, ATTN: MOCA-JF I USA Recruiting Cmd , Ft Sherdian , ATTN: USARCPM—P

1 USA Art ic Test Ctr , APO Seattle , ATTN: STEAC-MO-ASL I Senior Army Adv. , USAFAGOD/TAC , Elgin AF Aux FId No. 9

1 USA Artic Test Ctr, APO Seattle, ATTN: AMSTE-PL-TS I HO USARPAC , DCSPER , APO SF 96558, A’fl’N: GPPE—S E

1 USA Armament Cmd, Redstone Arsenal , ATTN: ATSK-TEM 1 Stimson Lib , Academy of Health Sciences, Ft Sam Houston

1 USA Armament Cmd, Rock Island , ATTN: AMSAR-TOC 1 Marine Corps Inst., ATTN: Dean—MCI

1 FAA-NAFEC , Atlantic City, ATTN: Library I HOUSMC, Commandant , A’fl’N: Code MTMT 51

1 FAA-NAFEC , Atlantic City, ATTN: Hum Engr Br 1 HQUSMC, Commandant . ATTN: Code MPI—20

I FAA Aeronautical Ctr, Oklahoma City, AflN: AAC-44D 2 USCG Academy, New London, ATTN: Admission

2 USA FId Arty Sch , Ft Sill, ATTN: Library 2 USCG Academy. New London, ATTN: Library

1 USA Armor Sch, Ft Knox , A1’TN: Library I USCG Training Ctr , NY , ATTN: CO

1 USA Armor Sch, Ft Knox , ATTN~ ATSB-Dl.E 1 USCG Training Ctr , NY , ATTN: Educ Svc Ofc

1 USA Armor Sch, Ft Knox , ATTN: ATSB-DT-TP I USCG. Psychol Res Br . DC, ATTN: GP 1/6 2

1 USA Armor Sch , Ft Knox , AT’TN : ATSB-CD.AO 1 HO Mid—Ra nge Br , MC Dot , Quantico, A’flN: P&S Div

47 ________________________

- 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ____

— - - _ . ~~,, ~~ ‘

~~t: -

_ -
1 US Marine Corps Liaision Ofc , AMC, Alexandria, ATTN: AMCGS—F 1 Oaf & Civil Inst of Envir o Med’ici~~. Canada

1 USATRADOC , Ft Monroe , ATTN : ATRO—ED I AIR CRESS, K.nalngton, ATTN: Info $y~ Br

6 USATRADOC. Ft Monroe , An N: ATPR—AD I Mlhtaerpeykologi.k Tiunsat., Coçseh.gen

1 USATRADOC, Ft Monroe, ATIN: ATTS—EA 1 Militvy Attache, French Embassy. ATTN: Doc Sec

I USA Forces Cmd, Ft McPherson, ATTN: Library I M.decin Chef, C.E.R.P.A.—Araen.I. Toulon/Naval France

2 USA Aviation Teat Bd, Ft Racker, ATTN: STEBG—PO 1 Prm Scientific Off , Apf l Hum Engr Rsds Div . Mini st ry

1 USA Agcy for Aviation Safety , Ft Rucker, ATTN: Library of Defense. N.w Delhi

I USA Agcy for Aciation Safety, Ft Rucker , ATTN : Educ Advisor 1 Pera Rach Ofc Library, AKA. Israel Defense Forces

1 USA Aviatio n Sch . Ft Racker . ATTN: P0 Drawer 0 1 Mlniateria van Defensi., DOOP/KL Afd Socia.l

1 HQUSA Aviation Sys Cmd. St Louis , ATTN: AMSAV—ZDR Psychologiache Zak.n, The Hague. Netherlands

2 USA Avi ation 9ys Test Act., Edwards AFB, ATIN: SAVTE—T

I USA Air Def Sch , Ft Bliss , ATTN: ATSA TEM

1 USA Air Mobili ty Rsch & Des Lab , Moffett FId , A’fl ’N: SAVOL—AS

1 USA Aviation Sch. Res Tng Mgt, Ft Rucker, ATTN: ATST—T—RTM

1 USA Aviation Sch, CO. Ft Rucker , A’fl ’N: ATST—D—A

1 HO, DARCOM, Alexandria , ATTN: AMXCD—TL

1 HQ, DARCOM . Alexandria , ATI’N: COR

1 US Military Academy, West Point , ATTN: Serials Unit

1 US Milita ry Academy, West Point , ATTN: Ofc of Milt Ldrsnp

1 US Military Academy, West Point , A1TN: MAO R

1 USA Stand ardization Gp, UK. FPO NY, AT1’N: MASE—GC

1 Ofc of Naval tlsch, Arlington , ATTN : Code 452

3 Ofc of Naval Rscli , Arlington , ATTN: Code 458

1 Ofc of Naval Rsch , Arlington, ATTN: Code 450

1 Ofc of Naval Rsch, Arlington , ATTN : Code 441

1 Naval Aerospc Med Res Lab . Pensacola , ATTN: Acou s Sch Div

1 Naval Aerospc Med Res Lab , Pensacola , ATTN: Code L51

1 Naval Aero spc Med Rex Lab . Pensacola , ATTN: Code L5

1 (,h,eI of NaePers , ATTN: Pert-OR

1 NAVAIRSTA , Norfolk , A’rrN: Safety Cu

1 Nay Oceanographic, DC, ATTN: Code 6251, Charts & Tech

1 Center of Naval Anal, ATTN: Dec Ctr

1 l’JavAirSysCom, ATIN: AIR—53 13C

1 Nay BuMed, ATTN: 713

1 NavHelicopterSubSqua 2, FPO SF 96601

1 AFHRL (FT) William AFB

I AFHRL ITT) Lowyy AFB

1 AFHRL (AS) WPAF B , OH

2 AFURL IDOJZ) Brooks AFB

1 AFHRL IDOJJ4) Lackland AFB

1 HOUSAF )INYSD)

1 HOUSAF (DPXXA I

1 AFVTG (RDI Randolph AFB

3 AMRL (HE) WPAFB , OH

2 AF Inst of Tech , WPAFB , OH, ATTN: ENE/SL

1 ATC (XPTO) Randolph AFB

1 USAF AcroMecl Lii,, Brooks AFB {SUL—4). ATTN: DOC SEC

1 AFOSR (NI_ I , Arlington

1 AF Log Cmd, McClellan AFB , ATTN. ALC/DPCRB

I Air Force Academy, CO. ATTN: Dept of Bel Scn

5 NavPers & Dee Ctr, San Diego

2 Navy Med Neuropsychiatric Rsch Unit, San Diego

1 Nay Electronic Lab, San Diego, A1TN: Rex Lab

1 Nay TrnqCen. San Diego, ATTN: Code 9000—Lib

1 NavPostGraSch , Monterey, ATTN: Code 55Aa

1 NavPostGra Sc h, Monterey, ATTN: Code 2124

I NavTrngEquipCtr, Orlando, ATTN: Tech Lib

1 US Dept of Labor, DC, ATTN: Manpower Admin

1 US Dept of Justice, DC, ATTN: Drug Enforce Admin

1 Nat Bur of Standards . DC, ATTN: Computer Info Section

1 Nat Clearing House for MH—lnfo , Rockville

1 Denver Federal Ctr , Lakewood, ATTN: BIM

12 Defense Documentation Center

4 Dir Psych, Army Hq, Russell Ofcs , Canberra

I Scientific Advtr, Mil Bd, Army Hq, Russell Ofca. Canberra

1 Mil and Air Attache , Austrian Embassy

1 Centre dv Recherche Des Facteurs , Humaine dv Ia Defense

Nationate , Brussels

2 Canadian Joint Staff Washington

I C/Ai Staff , Royal Canadian AF , ATTN: Pen Std Anal Br

3 Chief , Canadian Oaf RscPr Staff , ATTN: C/CRDS(W )

4 British Def Staff , British Embassy , Washingto n

48 

~~~~~- -~~~~~~~~~~ —