:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:市售商品包裝警告圖像之識認性調查與分析
書刊名:設計學研究
作者:羅凱楊小青林品章 引用關係
作者(外文):Lo, KaiYang, Hsiao-chingLin, Pin-chang
出版日期:2010
卷期:13:2
頁次:頁19-40
主題關鍵詞:標示警告圖像理解測試圖像設計包裝Warning signsIdentificationPictogramComprehension test
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(2) 博士論文(1) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:2
  • 共同引用共同引用:20
  • 點閱點閱:28
近年來,隨著消費權益意識之抬頭,商品安全性議題日益地受到重視。包裝是商品與消費者溝通的第一線,除了提供商品特性與功能等訊息之外,警告圖像識認性的良莠,更是影響人們能否正確與安全使用商品的關鍵性課題。本研究動機奠基於此,歷時一年,以實地的現況調查,蒐彙國內市售包裝之警告圖像,共計68款。研究透過歸納與分析,瞭解國內警告圖像使用之現狀與方式,並經由焦點小組的討論,取得代表性樣本37款,提供識認性評估之實驗,並更深入探討警告圖像的相關問題,提出理想的設計原則與建議。研究結果發現:(1)從警告圖像的意義來看,共計13種類型,其中以「禁止微波」(17.6%)、「小心燙手」(13.2%)、「保管注意」(13.2%)等三類圖像形態最為多樣,容易導致消費者的混淆,應予統一;(2)從商品應用範疇來看,主要有5種類型,其中以食品類(30.9%)、家用品類(29.4.%)及清潔用品類(23.5%)三者個數最多,並包含多類圖像意義,顯示此三類型商品趨向高警示類型商品,圖像意義應更為明確,以避免傷害;(3)識認性之調查評估顯示,合乎ISO 67%標準者,比率僅佔總體之32.43%,顯示目前多數警告圖像均無效用;(4)識認性高的圖像,多為生活經驗熟悉之具象形態,或約定成俗的記號,反之識認性低圖像,形態過於抽象或複雜瑣碎,圖像元件的配置與關係失當,易產生誤判或困擾。以上,值得後續相關研究及設計之參酌。
Product safety has become increasingly important with the rise of consumer rights in recent years. As the package is the first line of communication between the product and consumer, apart from informing consumers of the product features and functions, the ease of identification of warning signs on products becomes key to the accurate and safe use of products. Therefore, this study spent one year collecting the warning signs on products distributed in Taiwan through onsite inspection to investigate the status and approaches of warning sign use in Taiwan through analysis of 68 samples. After the focus group discussion, 37 samples were selected for the identification assessment and in-depth investigation of issues related to warning signs. Finally, the ideal design principles and suggestions are proposed. The results of research show: (1) There are 13 types of warning signs in meaning terms, and warning signs for "Do not microwave" (17.6%), "Warning: Hot Content" (13.2%) and "Take Care of Your Belongings" (13.2%) are the most diversified to confuse consumers and should thus be standardized. (2) There are 5 types of warning signs in product terms, and the warning signs for food (30.9%), household supplies (29.4%) and cleaning agents (23.5%) are the most in quantity and meanings, suggesting that these three types of products are highly user-sensitive and the signs should be clearer to prevent hazards. (3) Results of the identification assessment show only 32.43% of the samples conform to the ISO 67%, suggesting that most warning signs are ineffective. (4) Highly identifiable signs are representational and familiar in everyday life or are conventional symbols. By contrast, low identifiable symbols are too abstract, too complex or too trifling in form, with improper icon layout or associations that consumers often confuse or misjudge. These should be considered in future studies and designs.
期刊論文
1.Easterby, R. S.、Hakiel, S. R.(1981)。Field testing of consumer safety sign: The comprehension of pictorially presented messages。Applied Ergonomics,12(3),143-152。  new window
2.Foster, J. J.(1990)。Standardizing Public Information Symbols: Proposals for a Simpler Procedure。Information Design Journal,6(2),161-168。  new window
3.Rieber, L. P.(1995)。A historical review of visualization in human cognition。Educational Technology Research & Development,43(1),45-56。  new window
4.Cairney, P. T.、Sless, D.(1982)。Communication effectiveness of symbolic safety signs with different user groups。Applied Ergonomics,13(2),91-97。  new window
5.林榮泰(19930500)。Theoretical Review Of The Methodology For Evaluating Pictorial Symbols。明志工專學報,25,239-256。  new window
6.張嘉麟(2007)。淺論商品標示機制─以消費者保護之視點為中心。消費者保護研究,13,172-240。  延伸查詢new window
7.Janice, M. S.、Dewar, R.(1981)。Evaluation of Symbolic Public Information Signs。Human Factors,23(2),139-151。  new window
會議論文
1.李俊賢、曹壽民、張善政(1986)。道路交通標誌視覺影像之電腦模擬。臺北。  延伸查詢new window
研究報告
1.郭明堂(2004)。營建業勞工對安全標示之認知研究。臺南。  延伸查詢new window
學位論文
1.黃室苗(2003)。禁止符號之斜線和圖像特性對其視認度影響之探討,臺北。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.李如菁(1993)。電腦人機介面上圖像語意之研究(碩士論文)。國立成功大學。  延伸查詢new window
3.徐淑倩(1997)。圖書館全球資訊網圖誌之評估(碩士論文)。輔仁大學。  延伸查詢new window
4.薛博仁(2007)。臺灣高速鐵路車站公共指示性標誌認知之研究─以臺中站為例,雲林。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.鄧成連(1992)。現代商品包裝設計。臺北:新形象出版事業有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
2.FOMS(2009)。いのちを守ゐデザイン コミュニケーションデザイン(1)。東京:遊子館。  延伸查詢new window
3.Marcus, A.(1992)。Graphic design for electronic documents and user interface。Graphic design for electronic documents and user interface。New York。  new window
4.Horton, William L.(1994)。The Icon Book: Visual symbols for Computer Systems and Document。New York:John Wiley and Sons。  new window
5.許杏蓉(2003)。現代商業包裝學--理論.觀念.實務。臺北:視傳文化事業有限公司。new window  延伸查詢new window
6.Nielsen, Jakob(1993)。Usability Engineering。San Francisco, CA。  new window
7.方裕民(2003)。人與物的對話--互動介面設計理論與實務。台北市:田園城市出版社。  延伸查詢new window
8.王藍亭、曾瓊君(2004)。交通標誌圖像之警覺意念傳達研究─以「當心行人」標誌為例。2004中華印刷科技年報。臺北市。  延伸查詢new window
9.流通快訊雜誌(2008)。「臺灣量販店」「臺灣連鎖便利商店」。「臺灣量販店」「臺灣連鎖便利商店」。臺北。  延伸查詢new window
10.經濟部標準檢驗局(1982)。商品標示法。商品標示法。臺北。  延伸查詢new window
11.香港律政司(1998)。消費品安全規例。消費品安全規例。香港。  延伸查詢new window
其他
1.Ashley, F.,Myer, J.,Smith, D.(1971)。City signs and lights。  new window
2.Federal Trade Commission(2007)。Title 15-Commerce and Trade. Chapter 39-Fair Packaging and Labeling Program。  new window
3.(1990)。Public Information Symbols。  new window
4.Ringseis, E. L.,Caird, J. K.(1995)。The comprehensibility and Legibility of twenty pharmaceutical warning pictogram,Santa Monica。  new window
5.小小紙(塑膠)杯,安全大問題。  延伸查詢new window
6.心疼中年消費者─消基會力促放大商品標示字體。  延伸查詢new window
7.經濟部標準檢驗局。包裝食品標示CNS-3192。  延伸查詢new window
圖書論文
1.Saunders, A. C.(1994)。Graphics and how they communicate。Visual literacy: A spectrum of visual learning。Englewood Cliff, NJ:Educational Technology Publication。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top