Out of Order

Synonyms / Other Terms Used

Fault, Broken, Damaged, Flawed, Defect, Defective, Not Functioning

Category

Status, Services

Message / Function

To signify that a facility, installation, or piece of equipment (door, WC, telephone etc.) is temporarily or definitely not functioning

	Source	Description
	Icograda	Horizontal bar separated into two pieces by jagged line
*)	Icograda	Horizontal bar in outline, broken into two pieces, surrounded by aureole
	Icograda	Horizontal bar separated into two pieces by frayed fracture
	Icograda	Horizontal bar in outline, jagged part on the right indicating damage
1)	Icograda	Two gears meshing together, crossed out
	Icograda	Two gears meshing together, triangle near contact area
	Icograda	Two gears, one broken into two pieces
	Icograda	Broken gear
	Eko Purnomo	Broken gear, magnifying glass and triangle with exclamation mark in foreground
	Icograda	Arrow broken into two pieces, irregular fracture line
	Icograda	Socket, plug with cable below, unplugged
2)	Icograda	Hand with finger covering button, hand crossed out
	Icograda	Arrows froming circle, crossed out with two diagonal lines
3)	Icograda	Circle, crossed out with two diagonal lines
	HSSS	Red circle with diagonal slash inside

Besides the general messages above, additional variants related to specific facilities or pieces of equipment are available, too. Below some examples:

	ISO 7000	Cutting tool (horizontal bar), broken tip displayed in tilted position
	ISO 7000	Outline rectangle with two horizontal lines, separated into two pieces by jagged fracture
*)	ÖBB H	Railway carriage door with window partially in outline, diagonal slash

Discussion

The range of pictograms shown in the table above gives a good hint of the diversity of variants and image contents available to signify that a facility, installation, or piece of equipment is not functioning. Many of these graphic symbols were developed as entries for the Icograda student project (Frascara). No single visual stereotype can be identified.

In the context of this Icograda student project and the ISO test series 1979/80 (Easterby & Graydon, 1981 a) more than 30 pictogram variants intended for the message Out of Order were examined using the Appropriateness Ranking method. Subsequently three out of the best - marked 1) to 3) in the table above - were tested for comprehension (Easterby & Graydon, 1981 b). None of these variants reached an acceptable number of correct responses and for each of the symbols tested about one third of the participants did not respond at all. With 60.1 % wrong answers the pictogram labeled 2) was misinterpreted most often. The pictogram labeled 1) performed best with just 9.2 % correct responses. Regarding the fact, that no context information was offered, the results of that study should be interpreted with care.

In a Comprehension Test (Brugger, 1996) of four pictogram designs, which was conducted in Austria, the context information 'Inside a railway carriage' was provided. Even making use of lenient scoring, only the 6.9 % correct answers could be registered for the broken horizontal bar with aureole marked with *). Two thirds of the persons participating answered with Don't know. Regarding the ÖBB pictogram marked with *), which shows a door with window plus diagonal slash (displayed at the bottom of the table above), 63.4 % of the responses could be classified as correct for the message Door out of order, and even 74.0 % when lenient scoring was employed.

Recommendations

We suggest to develop additional pictogram variants. Then studies comparing several or all concepts should be conducted. The study design should also include a Comprehension Test to identify possible misinterpretations and to improve designs. As the location or context in which a symbol for the concept Out of Order / Not Functioning / Defective is used has significant influence on comprehension of this symbol, we suggest to include sufficient context information when conducting this Comprehension Test. Only on such a basis a good recommendation concerning a specific graphic symbol can be reached.

Tests of pictograms of referent Out of Order

Easterby, R.S. & Graydon, I.R. (1981 a): Evaluation of Public Information Symbols: ISO Test: 1979/80 Series. Part I: Appropriateness Ranking Tests. AP Report 99, Applied Psychology Department, University of Aston in Birmingham, January 1981.

Easterby, R.S. & Graydon, I.R. (1981 b): Evaluation of Public Information Symbols: ISO 1979/80 Test Series. Part II: Comprehension/Recognition Tests. AP Report 100, Applied Psychology Department, University of Aston in Birmingham, January 1981.

Brugger, Ch. (1996): Verständnistest UIC Kodex Merkblatt 413. Report to ÖBB GD 02 (Austrian Railways), Vienna, March 1996.