北京市道路交通标志的心理学评价  

THE PSYCHOLOGICAL EVALUATION OF TRAFFIC SIGNS IN BEIJING

作　　者：詹美莎 

机构地区：[1]北京体育学院

出　　处：《心理学报》1987年第2期167-175,共9页Acta Psychologica Sinica

摘　　要：实验分三部分进行。第一部分使用汽车司机调查表测定80种标志的可理解度,对标志意义的85％正确理解率定为标志可接受性标准。第二部分对第一部分中未达到标准的标志进一步进行长时记忆测验,以85％的再认正确率作为标志可接受的标准。第三部分对第一部分中未达到标准的标志进行短时记忆再认正确率和再认反应时测验,并对第二、第三部分的结果进行相关分析。结果表明:(1)65种标志理解度达到可接受标准,(2)交通标志的理解度主要取决于标志本身图形符号的直观性和单义性,以及司机的过去经验和学习效果。司机对标志的态度也对理解度有一定影响,(3)在理解度未达到标准的15种标志中,有14种的学习和记忆效果较好,长时记忆和短时记忆再认正确率都达到可接受标准。(4)“解除禁止超车”标志各项测验成绩均未达到标准,不宜作为正式标志使用,(5)以长时记忆和短时记忆再认正确率以及正确再认反应时作为指标来评价交通标志的优劣程度同样有效。The present research contains three parts: In Part Ⅰ, a driverquestionnaire was used to determine the interpretability of 80 trafficsigns in Beijing. The 85% correct interpretation rate was used as thereceptible standard. In Part Ⅱ, those traffic signs, which failed to reachthe receptible standard in Part Ⅰ, were examined with a long-termmemory test, also using the 85% correct recognization rate as thereceptible standard. These signs were examined with a short-termmemory-recognization test in Part Ⅲ. Then a correlation analysis wasmade with the results in Part Ⅱ and Part Ⅲ. The results showed: 1) 65 of the 80 traffic signs reached or exceeded the receptiblestandard; 2) The interpretability of the traffic signs depended on theirvisibility and simplicity. It also depended on the experience, knowledgeand attitude of the driver; 3) In the long-term and short-term memory tests, 14 of the 15 signs,which did not reach the receptible standard in Part Ⅰ, reached thereceptible standard of correct recognization; 4) The 'END NO OVERTAKING' sign failed to reach the receptiblestandard in all tests. It was therefore recommended that this signshould not be used as a formal traffic sign; 5) The correct recognization rate and the correct reaction time inthe long-term and short-term memory tests were of the same effectwhen they were used as criteria to evaluate the traffic signs.

关 键 词：禁令标志 直观性 正确率 可接受性 再认 调查表 正确理解 标准 短时记忆 长时记忆 

分 类 号：B[哲学宗教]