本研究透過半結構式訪談來探討圖像的歷程與錯誤辨識的原因，為增加研究之明確性與減少受測者之負擔，首先篩選出在Chi & Dewi(2014)研究中辨識率低於80%的圖像，再者本研究中的受試者採立意取樣，只測試有駕駛經驗的受試者，對於因為無經驗而導致低辨識率的圖像，在本研究亦不納入實驗。
過去研究多以量化的研究方法來對圖像做評估，但這樣的評估方式會忽略受試者在認知該圖像的認知知覺過程，所以本研究利用質化的訪談方式，希望能夠在使用者對圖像的認知歷程中找出圖像的錯誤辨識原因。
本研究在實驗結果方面利用內容分析法分析整理訪談的結果，將圖像的誤認與混淆原因依圖像的分類做歸納與整理。本次實驗結果，圖形圖像的錯誤辨識原因為：(1)使用者對該物品實際外型不熟悉、(2)圖形外型表達不明確、(3)圖形的形狀過於類似、(4)圖像功能意義表達不完整、(5)容易聯想到其他的代表意涵、(6)受鄰近的圖像影響、(7)圖像意義模糊、(8)與以熟悉的圖像相異。文字圖像的錯誤辨識原因為：(1)使用者不認識該英文字彙、(2)與縮寫文字混淆、(3)使用者無法聯結縮寫文字與原本單字的關係、(4)功能意義表達不完整、(5)功能名稱不明確、(6)容易聯想到其他的代表意涵、(7)功能指令不明確、(8)使用者對其功能不熟悉。最後為圖形加文字圖像的錯誤辨識原因：(1)與縮寫文字混淆、(2)文字字體尺寸太小、(3)文字字彙選用不當、(4)文字與圖形無法配合。

We use semi-structured interviews to explore the icon’s comprehension progress and the reason of icon misidentification. In order to increase definitude of this research and reduce the burden on subjects, we select the icons’ accuracy under 0.8 from Chi & Dewi’s study (2014). Furthermore we only test the subjects with driving experience, so we screen out the low accuracy icons due to those subjects without driving experience.
In the past researches, they usually used quantitative methods to evaluate icons. But under this kind of testing method will miss the cognitive processes. So in this research, we try to use qualitative method, interviews. We hope we can find the reasons of icon misidentification by the responses from subjects.
In the result, we use content analysis to collate the response from subjects. The reasons of icon misidentification of graphical icons: (1) users are not familiar to the actual object’s shape, (2) the icon’s shape represent is not clear, (3) there are some icons with similar features, (4) the representing of function meaning is incomplete, (5) the shape can also represent other meaning, (6) affected by neighbor icons, (7) the icon’s meaning is not clear, (8) different form icons already known. The reasons of icon misidentification of textual icons: (1) users don’t know the meaning of the word, (2) confused with abbreviation word, (3) can’t connect the abbreviation word with the original word, (4) the representing of function meaning is incomplete, (5) the name of the function is not clear, (6) the word can also represent other meaning, (7) function instruction is not clear, (8) uses is not familiar with the function. The reasons of icon misidentification of combined icons: (1) confused with abbreviation word, (2) the word size is too small in the icon, (3) misuse the word, (4) text and shape features did not match each other.

一、中文部分
1. 賴采秀 (2014)，「智慧型行動裝置應用程式圖示之視認度與聯想力研究」，碩士論文，國立台灣科技大學。
2. 韓宜廷 (2006)，「數位媒體界面圖像設計語意脈絡轉換方法之研究：以MP3隨身聽為例」，碩士論文，國立台中技術學院。
3. 黃貴莉 (2000)，「醫院安全標誌及設置環境之研究」，碩士論文，大同大學
4. 林榮泰 (1990)，「電腦輔助設計系統的人機介面圖像認知特性之研究」，技術與教育研討會論文集，第53卷第64期，p.5。
5. 林榮泰 (1991)，從圖像語意傳達探討人機介面圖像的視認與設計，科技學刊，第6卷第2期，pp195-202
6. 林榮泰 (1993)，評估圖像符號方法的研究，明志工專學報，第25期，pp.239-256
7. 陳立民、張栢烟、黃俊綸、陳怡欣 (2005)，「從隱喻手法探討圖形使用者介面之溝通意涵」，數位設計研討會-數位內容之教學、研發與產學合作，台中技術學院，p.156-165。
8. 吳菁樺 (2004)，「圖地反轉類型標誌意象認知之探討」，碩士論文，銘傳大學
9. 林江輝 (2007)，「從形狀辨識理論觀點探討交通運輸場站標誌圖像設計」，碩士論文，國立台灣科技大學。
10. 蕭淑芳 (2004)，「電腦繪圖軟體圖像設計形式對圖像意義傳達影響之研究」，碩士論文，國立成功大學。
11. 施純銘 (1994)，「機器產品安全性操作系統之認知性研究-以射出成型機器操作面板設計為例」，碩士論文，國立成功大學
二、英文部分
12. Chi , Chia-Fen, Dewi, Ratna Sari (2014) Matching performance of vehicle icons in graphical and textual formats, Applied Ergonomics, 45, 904-916.
13. Horton, W. (1994), The icon book. NY: John Wiley & Sons.
14. Campbell, J.L., Richman, J.B., Carney, C., Lee, J.D., 2004b. Guidelines. In: In-vehicle Display Icons and Other Information Elements, vol. I. Office of Safety Research and Development, Federal Highway Administration.
15. Solos, Robert L. (1994), Cognition and the Visual Arts, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
16. Paivio, A. (1986), Mental representations: a dual coding approach, Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
17. Minichiello V., Aroni R., Timewell E. & Alexander L. (1995). In- depth Interviewing, Second Edition. South Melbourne: Longman.
18. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1998). The landscape of qualitative research: Theories and issues. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
19. Marcus, A. (1984), Baby Face: User Interface Design for Small Displays. ACM, p.18-23.
20. Kaneko, S., H. Ikemoto, and Y. Kusui. (1991) Approach to designing easy-to-understand icons. Visual Languages, Proceedings. 1991 IEEE Workshop on , pp. 246-53.
21. Easterby, R. S., & Zwaga, H. (1984). Developing Effective Symbols for Public Information, In R. S.Easterby & H. J. G. Zwaga (Eds.), Information design (pp. 277-297). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.