Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Designing Usable Icons For Non E-Literate User
Designing Usable Icons For Non E-Literate User
Designing Usable Icons For Non E-Literate User
nsaptadi@yahoo.com).
I. BACKGROUND
should be [7],[8]. Krisnawati and Restyandito [7] further II. RELATED WORK
pointed out that user experience and cultural background Many studies have been directed at this problem such as:
play an important role in understanding the user-cellphone using a pictorial interface for self-identification of illiterate
interface. Diverse users from different countries, groups villagers [12]; icon-based interfaces to access Automated
and religions have different beliefs and values, thus have Teller Machines [13], and; application of text-free user
different perceptions and expectations. Gao and Krogstie interfaces [3]. One way to improve user ability to make use
[9] also highlighted the relevance of the cultural dimension of technology is by employing pictures and symbols.
as one of the factors affecting the adoption of mobile Previous studies have reported that users with a low level of
information services. literacy prefer fully iconic interfaces [14], and that audio
capabilities can enhance usability [15]. But many of the
According to the International Organization for symbols used in current technologies, including those on
Standardization [10], usability is defined as “the extent to cell phones, were derived from computer interfaces which
which a product can be used by specified users to achieve use office metaphors, whereas the variety of backgrounds of
specified goals with effectiveness, efficiency and users now extends far beyond office workers. Among the
satisfaction in a specified context of use”. It is a major many types of users there are farmers, fishermen and food
challenge for us to develop a user-friendly technology for sellers, none of whom have ever been exposed to modern
the illiterate and non computer literate users. technology before. Icons using cultural and often Western
concept, such as musical notes may not make sense to many
This paper will examine some possible alternative users [8].
icons that can be used to symbolize functions often
encountered in a cell phone and discuss whether those One of the essential factors in studying usability is
icons help illiterate and non e-literate users in guessability [16],[17]. When users look at a device for the
understanding the functionality of a phone. Martin and first time, they will construct a mental model of how it
Ashworth [11] defined e-literacy as the awareness, skills, works [18], therefore an interface need to have a good
understandings, and reflective approaches necessary for an affordance and visibility [19]. Affordance is the action
individual to operate comfortably in information-rich and possibilities of which a person is aware in relation to a
IT-enabled environments. particular design. The
concept, idea or function of a device can be represented Metaphors are commonly used to map user understanding of
using an icon. When designing an interface, choosing the a product, and activities and reactions, to a product. They
right icon will provide several benefits, such as making use help make sense of user needs in relation to the physical
of the extensive ability that people have in pattern attributes of the product and the source of inspiration for a
recognition. Icons offer language independence for using metaphor [24]. The most commonly used metaphor is the
products regardless of geographical locations, they reduce desk or office metaphor to help users understand how
the space required to display information, and can offer a computers organize data (store, manipulate, delete, etc.) in
certain level of aesthetic appeal. However, the effectiveness RAM (Random Access Memory) using familiar objects such
of the imagery used for . influenced by the cultural as files, folders, and trash bin [22]. Other widely seen
background of the user [20],[21]. An icon must depict easy metaphors are used on the Internet, where, for example, the
association with the message. There are many approaches to metaphor of a book with pages (web page, home page, etc.),
designing an icon, namely, resemblance, exemplar, text (hypertext), bookmark, etc. are used.
symbolic and arbitrary [22].Icons that show a direct image
of the function or concept itself is called a resemblance An icon might not be effective if the meaning conveyed
icon. A picture of a radio resembles the function of a real is not interpreted correctly by the users. In one of their
world object which is a radio. Icons that provide examples interviews, Krisnawati and Restyandito [7] came across
to convey their meaning are called exemplar icons. A sun is several users who thought that an envelope is used to
one object that can be used, for example, when explaining represent the function of transferring money. They built their
about weather. Symbolic icons are used to present the mental model on their experience with using envelopes.
underlying referent that is at a higher level of abstraction Since they never received or sent mail, they had no clue that
than the image itself. A compass representing a browser is an envelope can be used to represent sending text messages
an example of a symbolic icon. A compass as a navigational on a cell phone. They had only used envelopes to give
tool is used to depict the use of a browser to navigate the donations or gifts at wedding parties or various social events,
web. Arbitrary icons have no relationship to their intended thus they quite correctly concluded that, for them, an
meaning so the association must be learned. A green robot envelope represents giving or transferring money to
to represent the android operating system is an example of someone.
an arbitrary icon.
There were two sets of simple concrete icons. The first set
consisted of target icons that are often found in cell phones
to represent the functions of Short Message Service (T10),
setting the alarm (T20), making a call (T30) and playing
games (T40), whereas the second set of icons (A11, A21,
A31, A41, A12, A22, A32, A42) were alternative icons.
Icons A11 and A12 were used as alternative symbols for the
Short Message Service (SMS) function, icons A21 and A22
were used as alternative symbols to represent alarm, and so
on for the remaining icons (see Figure 1).
TABLE II
THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE RESPONDENT’S GROUP
Given Not given any
Total
ISBN: 978-988-19252-6-8 IMECS 2013
ISSN: 2078-0958 (Print); ISSN: 2078-0966 (Online)
Proceedings of the International MultiConference of Engineers and Computer Scientists 2013 Vol II,
IMECS 2013, March 13 - 15, 2013, Hong Kong
IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION phones. With the exception of icon T30 (telephone), the
The data collected were tested using the Anderson- number of interviewees who guessed correctly was below
Darling test and the p-values for the respondents were 50%.
0.458 for cell phone user and 0.656 for nonuser
respectively. Using an α level of 5%, it can be concluded Although the cell phone user group used their cell
that the data were from a normally distributed population. phones on a daily basis, not all of them could identify icon
Table III presents the summary result obtained from the T20 (an alarm clock). When asked further, many of them
interview for response scores. said that they only use their cell phone to make or receive
calls and messages. Even some of those who could identify
TABLE the icon as a clock interpreted it as a feature to show the
III present time, they were not aware that the phone had an
The Results of the interview
Target Icon Alternative Icon 1 Alternative Icon 2
alarm clock feature. This is not surprising, because as Lalji
T T T T A A A A A A A A [8] pointed out, many users found the icon and menu
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 Tot.
Grp. 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 options made no sense to them and they therefore ignored
C.G.
C.A.
12
10
10
5
13
10
9
8
2
1
7
2
9
9
13
8
2
0
2
0
4
4
12
9
95
66
the associated functions. Some users even got intimidated
Tot. 22 15 23 17 3 9 18 21 2 2 8 21 by the presence of numerous symbols and gave up trying
(%) 96 65 100 74 13 39 78 91 9 9 35 91
N.G 4 4 8 5 4 6 6 9 3 6 2 11 68 and concluding that they were not smart enough to operate
.
N.A 5 2 7 3 4 5 7 11 3 3 1 10 61 a cell phone.
.
Tot. 9 6 15 8 8 11 13 20 6 9 3 21
(%) 41 27 68 36 36 50 59 91 27 41 14 95 When we compare users understanding of the target icons
to the alternative icons, we see a reversal of the results.
We can see that for the target icons (T10, T20, T30 and (Figure 2) The average percentage of cell phone users
T40), with the exception of T20 which reached a level of decreased from 83.75% for the target icons down to 45.63%
65%, cell phone user comprehension level of the icons for the alternative icons but for the nonusers, the average
used were above the ISO 3864 requirement that symbol percentage increased from 43% for the target icons up to
comprehension must reach a criterion of at least 67% 51.63% for the alternative icons. However, there was no
correct to be considered acceptable. There was a strong strong evidence that non cellphone users performed better
correlation between experience and level of than cellphone users on the alternative icons, t(21) = 0.562 ,
comprehension, t(22) = 16.41, p < 0.05 (one-tailed). On p
the contrary non cell phone users had difficulty in > 0.05 (one-tailed).
understanding the meaning of the target icons used in cell
devices, and as Jordan [16] has stated, experience plays an
important factor in usability. However, our interest here is
more directed at the nonuser groups, since they are the ones
that have difficulty in using the technology. It may be seen
that, for all participants, a significant increase occurred in
understanding message intended in icon T40 (games), when
the simple and familiar symbols of deck of cards (A41) and a
domino (A42) were used to represent games. The nonuser
understood that the symbol represented games.
Even though for A11, A12 and A31, A32, the alternative
icons for T10 (text message) and T30 (making call)
respectively, the percentage recognition rate declined , still
some respondents interpreted them correctly, in fact 59%
for A31 which shows that the proposed alternative
metaphor may help some of people in understanding the
functions of the cell phone. Icon A11 a kentongan (an
Fig. 3. Comprehension score of cellphone user and nonuser. instrument made from hollowed branch used in many
villages in Indonesia as a means to give information to the
For the nonusers an increase in understanding of the neighborhood such as an event occurring (guest visit,
message ‘alarm clock’ occurred when the alternative icons meeting, etc.), danger (flood, fire, a thief) as well as time
were used instead of T20 (an alarm clock). The scores rose (used by the night guard to inform about important times
from 27% for T20 up to 50% and 41% respectively for such as prayer time)) and A31 (two people facing each
alternative icons A21 and A22. Respondents identified icon other talking) were better understood than icon A12
A21 with the rooster crow they heard in the morning, while (megaphone) and A32 (people whispering information).
Some respondents mistakenly identified Icon A32 as a
person praying, thus they interpreted it as a function to alert
the user about prayer times (the majority of Indonesian
people are Moslems and pray 5 times a day). Therefore,
incorrect, or rather unintended, interpretations occurred
because respondents could identify a symbol with different
objects.
V. CONCLUSION
This study has shown the use of the right metaphor can
improve users understanding of an icon. Further study is
needed to determine suitable interface metaphors. A User
Centered Design approach recommends techniques like
contextual inquiry [32], field study and ethnographic study
as general solutions to many usability problems [33].
Combining the right representation of icon, text and speech
will increase the usability of cell phones.
Fig. 5. Comprehension score from each city.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
In this study, prior knowledge was found to result in
better comprehension of the target icons. As may be seen in The first author would like to thank the Directorate
Table III, both groups had higher percentage correct scores General of Higher Education of Indonesia for supporting
when briefed about cell phone functions. Prior knowledge this study at City University of Hong Kong.
may have helped to build the mental model needed to
understand the icon [22]. REFERENCES
[1] H. Rugayah, I.K. Sari, U.Y. Aznita, M.F. Murni, and F.S.M. Sharifah,
In order to improve user understanding of symbols, “Digital inclusion and lifestyle transformation among the Orang Asli:
Sacrificing culture for modernity?”, Asian Social Science, Oct 2012,
strong emphasis should be placed on using designs which Vol 8, Issue 12, 2012. pp. 80-87
have obvious and direct connections with things [2] S. Mitra, “Self organizing systems for mass computer literacy:
encountered in daily life [17]. Disparities in culture can Findings from the hole in the wall experiments” in International
Journal of Development Issues, Vol. 4, No. 1 pp. 71 – 81, 2005
create misunderstanding, consequently designs developed [3] I. Medhi, “Text-Free User Interfaces for illiterate and semiliterate
and used successfully in one culture do not necessarily Users” in Information Technologies & International Development,
work well for people from another culture. Our ability to Vol.4, Issue 1., 2007
visually perceive and interpret information is a precondition [4] T. Parikh, K. Ghosh, and A. Chavan, “Design considerations for a
Financial Management System for rural, semi-literate users”. ACM
for an efficient handling of graphical user interfaces. It is Conference on Computer-Human Interaction, 2003
easy to assume that all people make sense of the world in [5] B.V. Ratnam, P.K. Reddy, and G.S. Reddy, ”eSagu: An IT based
very similar ways; this ignores behavioral and neurological personalized agricultural extension system prototype – analysis of 51
Farmers’ case studies” in International Journal of Education and
findings showing that how we perceive information is Development using Information and Communication Technology
strongly influenced by our cultural background [29]. (IJEDICT), Vol. 2, Issue 1, 2005. pp. 79-94.
Previous studies have indicated that localizing an interface [6] D. Heuklman, "Can a user centered approach to designing a user
interface for rural communities be successful?" in Procedings of
is preferred by users [30], [25]. A study done by Wang [20]
conference CHI-SA, Cape Town, South Africa, 25-27 January, 2006
pointed out that Taiwanese computer users recognized pp. 51-58
cultural icons combined with Chinese characters more [7] L.D. Krisnawati, and Restyandito, "Localized User Interface for
accurately than standard icons combined with an improving cellphone users device competency" in International
Journal of Information Technology and Web Engineering, Vol.3,
international alphabet. Katre’s research on illiterate users No.4,
also suggested that pictures/symbols in the interface should January-March 2008, IGI Publishing. 2008
reflect the mental model of users and should be localized, as [8] Z. Lalji, and J. Good, "Designing new technologies for illiterate
populations: A study in mobile phone interface design" in Interacting
users come from different geographical conditions and with Computers, Vol.20, Issue 6, December 2008, Elsevier B.V, 2008.
lifestyles [12]. pp. 574-586