本論文包含了小客車視覺與聽覺警報訊號的兩個實驗。第一個實驗將82個車輛圖象分為7個類別（具象圖案，概念相關，半抽象，任意，縮寫，文字和組合），以匹配準確性，匹配順序和匹配時間。這些數據可作為未來開發圖象比較的基礎與架構。共有四十名受試者參加實驗，每位都有大學學位。一半的受試者有駕駛經驗，而另一半沒有開過車。結果顯示，平均而言，文字圖象的匹配正確度明顯高於其他圖象格式; 其差異量從4.7％到20.8％。關於匹配順序，參與者最先匹配的是具象圖案的圖象。任意和組合的圖象的匹配時間比其他圖象格式多出1.4到6.2秒。第二個實驗中，共招募了21名駕駛經驗豐富的受試者來評估由11個汽車品牌製造的四個功能（喇叭，指示器，門打開警告和停車傳感器）的警報聲音。每個受試者需要通過對比較測試來評估所有上述警報信號。在比較測試後，將每個受試者的對比較結果呈現給他們看，要求每個受試者評論他們的偏好和聲音的適切性。整合比較了物理參數和訪談資料，以提出設計建議。研究結果表明，複雜的音調和約450 Hz的基本頻率是汽車喇叭的偏好，而對於方向燈，偏好的聲音具有較高的主頻率。為了減少單調，雙主頻率的方向燈和兩次點擊之間330至400ms的靜止時間間隔是最受偏好的。關於開門警告聲音，最偏好的是以高強度開始然後衰減到零強度的波形，而對於倒車警報器，以較長OFF時間（約500ms）開始並具有3或4個可區別的速度變化聲音是最受偏好的。

This study presents two experiments on visual and auditory signs of passenger cars. The first experiment classified 82 vehicle icons into 7 categories (image-related, concept-related, semi-abstract, arbitrary, abbreviation, word, and combined) for their matching accuracy, matching sequence, and matching time. This data can be compared and used as a framework for future icon development. Forty participants, all with a university degree, took part in this experiment. Half of the participants had intensive driving experience, while the other half never driven a car. The results indicated, that on average, word icons had a significantly greater matching accuracy than the other icon formats; ranging from a 4.7% to 20.8% difference. Regarding the matching sequence, participants matched image-related icons before other icon formats. Arbitrary and combined icons took significantly longer to match than other icon formats by 1.4 to 6.2 s. Based on the high matching accuracy (86.3%) and high ratings on subjective design features, word format can be used for functions describable using simple English for users with English reading ability. In the second experiment, twenty-one experienced drivers were recruited for the evaluation of sounds of four functions (horn, indicator, door open warning, and parking sensor) made by 11 car brand names. Each participant was required to evaluate all of the above sound signals by a pair-comparison test. After the comparison test, each participant was shown his/her pair-comparison result and was asked to comment on their preference and appropriateness of a sound. The physical properties and interview data were compared and summarized to propose design recommendations. Our results indicate that complex tones and a fundamental frequency around 450 Hz were most preferred for horns while for indicators the preferred sounds had a higher dominant frequency. To reduce monotony, the indicators with double clicks and an OFF time interval of between 330 to 400 ms between two clicks were most preferred. Regarding door warning sounds, the waveform starting with a higher intensity then fading towards zero intensity is most preferred while for parking sensors, sounds beginning with a longer OFF time (about 500 ms) and having 3 or 4 distinctive tempo variations were most preferred.

Akamatsu, M., Green, P., & Bengler, K. (2013). Automotive technology and human factors research: Past, present, and future. International journal of vehicular technology, Vol. 2013.
ANSI (1973). American national psychoacoustical terminology.S3.20.-1973 New York: American National Standards Institute.
Antin, J.F., Lauretta, D.J., & Wolf, L.D. (1991). The intensity of auditory warning tones in the automobile environment: detection and preference evaluations. Applied Ergonomics, 22, 13-19.
Baber, C. & Wankling, J. (1992). An experimental comparison of test and symbols for in-car reconfigurable displays. App. Ergon. 23, 255–262.
Ballas, J. A. (1993). Common factors in the identification of an assortment of brief everyday sounds. Journal of experimental psychology: human perception and performance, 19(2), 250.
Berlyne, D. E. (1971). Aesthetics and psychobiology. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Bigelow, J., & Poremba, A. (2014). Achilles' ear? Inferior human short-term and recognition memory in the auditory modality. PloS one, 9(2), e89914.
Blankenberger, S. & Hahn, K. (1991). Effects of icon design on human-computer interaction. Int. J. Man. Mach. Stud. 35, 363–377.
Blattner, M.M., Sumikawa, D.A., & Greenberg, R.M. (1989). Earcons and icons: their structure and common design principles. Human–Computer Interaction, 4, 11–44.
Blauert, J. (1994). Product-sound design and assessment: An enigmatic issue from the point of view of engineering?. In INTER-NOISE and NOISE-CON Congress and Conference Proceedings (Vol. 1994, No. 5, pp. 857-862). Institute of Noise Control Engineering.
Blauert, J., & Jekosch, U. (1997). Sound-quality evaluation–a multi-layered problem. Acta acustica united with acustica, 83(5), 747-753.
Blauert, J., & Jekosch, U. (2003). Concepts behind sound quality: Some basic considerations. In INCE Conference Proceedings (Vol. 206, No. 1, pp. 72-79).
Bradley, S. (2016, March 29). An Introduction To Semiotics — Signifier And Signified [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://vanseodesign.com/web-design/semiotics-signifier-signified/ .
Campbell, J.L., Hoffmeister, D.H., Keifer, R.J., Selke, D.J., Green, P.A., & Richman, J.B. (2004a). Comprehension testing of active safety symbols (2004-01-0450), in: 2004 SAE World Congress and Exhibition Technical Papers. pp. 8–11.
Campbell, J.L., Richman, J.B., Carney, C., & Lee, J.D. (2004b). In-Vehicle Display Icons and Other Information Elements Volume I: Guidelines. Office of Safety Research and Development, Federal Highway Administration.
Carney, C., Campbell, J.L., & Mitchell, E.A. (1998). In-Vehicle Display Icons and Other Information Elements: Literature Review (No. FHWA-RD-98-164). Federal Highway Administration.
Chandler, D. (2007). Semiotic: The basic 2nd edition. London : Routledge
Chi, C. F., & Dewi, R. S. (2014). Matching performance of vehicle icons in graphical and textual formats. Applied ergonomics, 45(4), 904-916.
Chi, C. F., & Drury, C. G. (1988). A further note on psychophysical testing of handles. Applied ergonomics, 19(4), 315-318.
Chi, C. F., & Drury, C. G. (1998). Do people choose an optimal response criterion in an inspection task?. IIE transactions, 30(3), 257-266.
Chi, C.F., & Lin, F.T. (1998a). A comparison of seven visual fatigue assessment techniques in three data-acquisition VDT tasks. Hum. Factors 40, 577–590.
Chi, C. F., & Lin, Y. T. (1998b). Ratings of 830 jobs on 45 characteristics: factor and cluster analyses into age-enhanced, age-neutral and age-counteracted, and age-impaired categories. Perceptual and motor skills, 87(3 Pt 1), 803-816.
Chi, C. F., Tseng, L. K., & Jang, Y. (2012). Prune a decision tree of selecting computer-related assistive devices for the disable user. IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems & Rehabilitation Engineering, 20(4), 564-73
Cockburn, A., Gutwin, C., & Greenberg, S. (2007). A predictive model of menu performance, in: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. pp. 627–636.
Cooper, G. E. (1977). A survey of the status of and philosophies relating to cockpit warning systems (No. NASA-CR-152071).
Deatherage, B. H. (1972). Auditory and other sensory forms of information presentation. In H.P. Van Cott and R.G. Kinkade (eds.), Human engineering guide to equipment design. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office 123-160.
Dewar, R.E., Ells, J.G., & Mundy, G. (1976). Reaction time as an index of traffic sign perception. Hum. Factors, 18, 381–392.
Doll, T. J., & Folds, D. J. (1986). Auditory signals in military aircraft: ergonomics principles vs. practice. Applied Ergonomics, 17, 257-264.
Doughty, J. M., & Garner, W. R. (1947). Pitch characteristics of short tones. I. Two kinds of pitch threshold. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 37(4), 351.
Doughty, J. M., & Garner, W. R. (1948). Pitch characteristics of short tones. II. Pitch as a function of tonal duration. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 38(4), 478.
Duffy, V. G., Ng, P. P., & Ramakrishnan, A. (2004). Impact of a simulated accident in virtual training on decision-making performance. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 34(4), 335-348.
Edworthy, J. (1994). The design and implementation of non-verbal auditory warnings. Applied ergonomics, 25(4), 202-210.
Edworthy, J., Loxley, S., & Dennis, I. (1991). Improving auditory warning design: Relationship between warning sound parameters and perceived urgency. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 33(2), 205-231.
Edworthy, J., & Waring, H. (2006). The effects of music tempo and loudness level on treadmill exercise. Ergonomics, 49(15), 1597-1610.
Edworthy, J., Page, R., Hibbard, A., Kyle, S., Ratnage, P., & Claydon, S. (2014) Learning three sets of alarms for the same medical functions: a perspective on the difficulty of learning alarms specified in an international standard. Applied Ergonomics, 45, 1291-1296.
Gales, R. (1979). Hearing characteristics. In C. M. Harris (Ed.), Handbook of noise control (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Gaver, W. W. (1997). Auditory interfaces. Handbook of human-computer interaction, 1, 1003-1041.
Geiser, G. (1985). Man machine interaction in vehicles. ATZ 87, 74–77.
Genuit, K. (1996). Objective evaluation of acoustic-quality based on a Relative Approach, Inter-Noise 1996. Proceedings, Liverpool, England.
Genuit, K. (2004). The sound quality of vehicle interior noise: a challenge for the NVH-engineers. International Journal of Vehicle Noise and Vibration, 1(1-2), 158-168.
Genuit, K. & Fiebig, A. (2014) Sound design of electric vehicles - Challenges and risks. Inter-noise 2014, Page 1 of 10. Melbourne.
Goonetilleke, R.S., Heloisa, M.S., On, H.K., & Fritsch, J. (2001). Effects of training and representational characteristics in icon design. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 55, 741–760.
Green, P. (1993). Design and evaluation of symbols for automobile controls and displays, in: Peacock, B., Karwowski, W. (Eds.), Automotive Ergonomics. Taylor & Francis Ltd.London, pp. 237-268.
Green, P. (1999). Visual and Task Demands of Driver information Systems. (Technical Report UMTRI-98-16), Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute.
Green, P., & Pew, R.W. (1978). Evaluating pictographic symbols: an automotive application. Hum. Factors 20, 103–114.
Handel, S. (1995) Timbre Perception and Auditory Object Identification. In B.C.J. Moore (Ed.). Hearing: Handbook of Perception and Cognition, 2nd edition, (pp. 425-461). San Diego, London: Academic Press.
Horton, W. (1994). The Icon Book: Visual Symbols for Computer Systems and Documentation, 1st ed. Wiley. New York.
Howard, D.M. & Angus J.A.S. (2009) Acoustics and Psychoacoustics, 4th edition, Oxford: Focal Press.
Howard, J. H., & Ballas, J. A. (1980). Syntactic and semantic factors in the classification of nonspeech transient patterns. Perception & Psychophysics, 28(5), 431-439.
Huang, Y., Di, G., Zhu, Y., Hong, Y., & Zhang, B. (2008). Pair-wise comparison experiment on subjective annoyance rating of noise samples with different frequency spectrums but same A-weighted level. Applied Acoustics, 69(12), 1205-1211.
Huang, S.-M., Shieh, K.-K., & Chi, C.-F. (2002). Factors affecting the design of computer icons. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 29, 211–218.
Humphreys, L., Giudice, S., Jennings, P. Cain, R., Song, W. & Dunne, G. (2011) The influence of company identity on the perception of vehicle sounds. Ergonomics, 54, 338-346.
International Organization for Standardization (ISO). (2003). Ergonomics. Danger signals for public and work areas (Standard No. ISO 7731:2003). Geneva, Switzerland: ISO.
International Organization for Standardization (ISO). (2010). Road Vehicles-Symbols for Controls, Indicators and Tell-Tales (ISO standard 2575).Geneva, Switzerland: International Standards Organization.
Isherwood, S.J., McDougall, S.J.P., & Curry, M.B. (2007). Icon identification in context: the changing role of icon characteristics with user experience. Hum. Factors 49, 465 –476.
Jennings, P A, Dunne, G., Williams, R., & Giudice, S. (2010) Tools and techniques for understanding the fundamentals of automotive sound quality. Transactions of the IMechE Part D: Journal of Automobile Engineering, 224 (10), 1263–1278.
Jesteadt, W., Luce, R. D., & Green, D. M. (1977). Sequential effects in judgments of loudness. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 3(1), 92.
Kern, D., & Schmidt, A. (2009). Design space for driver-based automotive user interfaces, in: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications, AutomotiveUI ’09. ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp. 3–10.
Kim, T. G., Lee, S. K., & Lee, H. H. (2009). Characterization and quantification of luxury sound quality in premium-class passenger cars. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part D: Journal of Automobile Engineering, 223(3), 343-353.
Kraus, N., Skoe, E., Parbery‐Clark, A., & Ashley, R. (2009). Experience‐induced malleability in neural encoding of pitch, timbre, and timing. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1169(1), 543-557.
Kun, A. L., Schmidt, A., Dey, A., & Boll, S. (2013). Automotive user interfaces and interactive applications in the car. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 17(5), 801.
Kuwano, S., Fastl, H., Namba, S., Nakamura, S., & Uchida, H. (2002). Subjective evaluation of car door sound. Proc. Sound-Quality Sym., Dearborn MI.
Lemaitre, G., Susini, P., Winsberg, S., McAdams, S., & Letinturier, B. (2009). The sound quality of car horns: Designing new representative sounds. Acta acustica united with Acustica, 95(2), 356-372.
Licklider, J. C. R. (1961). Audio warning signals for Air Force weapon systems. Behavioral Sciences Laboratory, Aerospace Medical Laboratory, Wright Air Development Division, Air Research and Development Command, United States Air Force.
Liu, Y.C., & Ho, C.H. (2012). The effects of age on symbol comprehension in central rail hubs in Taiwan. Appl. Ergon. 43, 1016–1025.
Lodding, K.N., (1983). Iconic Interfacing. IEEE Comput. Graph. Appl. 3, 11–20.
Mao, D., Yu, W., Gao, Y., & Wang, Z. (2004). Error rating of paired comparison listening test for sound quality assessment. In Proceeding of ICA 2004.
Margono, S., and Shneiderman, B. (1993). A study of file manipulation by novices using commands vs direct manipulation. Sparks of innovation in human-computer interaction, 39.
Marslen-Wilson, W. D., & Welsh, A. (1978). Processing interactions and lexical access during word recognition in continuous speech. Cognitive psychology, 10(1), 29-63.
McDougall, S., & Curry, M. (2004). More than just a picture: icon interpretation in context. Proceedings of First International Workshop on Coping with Complexity. University of Bath.
McDougall, S.J.P., Curry, M.B., & de Bruijn, O. (1999). Measuring symbol and icon characteristics: norms for concreteness, complexity, meaningfulness, familiarity, and semantic distance for 239 symbols. Behav. Res. Methods. 31, 487–519.
McDougall, S.J.P., and Reppa, I. (2008). Why do I like it the relationships between icon characteristics, user performance and aesthetic appeal. Proc. Hum. Factors. Ergon. Soc. Annu. Meet. 52, 1257–1261.
Meng, F., Li, S., Cao, L., Peng, Q., Li, M., Wang, C, & Zhang, W. (2016). Designing Fatigue Warning Systems: The perspective of professional drivers. Applied Ergonomics. 53, 122-130.
Mercep, L. (2014). Context-Centric Design of Automotive Human-Machine Interface (Ph.D)., Techniche Universitat at Munchen.
Meredith, C., & Edworthy, J. (1994). Sources of confusion in intensive therapy unit alarms. In N. Stanton (Ed.), Human factors in alarm design (pp. 207-219). Bristol, PA: Taylor & Francis, Inc.
Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological review, 63(2), 81.
Mudd, S. A. (1961). The scaling and experimental investigation of four dimensions of pure tone and their use in an audio-visual monitoring problem (Doctoral dissertation, Purdue University).
Ng, A.W.Y., Chan, A.H.S. (2008). The effects of driver factors and sign design features on the comprehensibility of traffic signs. J. Safety Res. 39, 321–328.
Ng, A.W.Y., Chan, A.H.S. (2007). The guessability of traffic signs: effects of prospective-user factors and sign design features. Accid. Anal. Prev. 39, 1245–1257.
North, A. C., & Hargreaves, D. J. (1995). Subjective complexity, familiarity, and liking for popular music. Psychomusicology: A Journal of Research in Music Cognition, 14(1-2), 77.
Otto, N., Amman, S., Eaton, C., & Lake, S. (1999). Guidelines for jury evaluations of automotive sounds (No. 1999-01-1822). SAE Technical Paper.
Parizet, E. (2002). Paired comparison listening tests and circular error rates. Acta acustica united with acustica, 88(4), 594-598.
Paivio, A. (1971). Imagery and Verbal Processes. Holt, Rinehart& Winston, Oxford.
Patterson, R. D. (1982). Guidelines for auditory warning systems on civil aircraft. Civil Aviation Authority.
Patterson, R. D., & Mayfield, T. F. (1990). Auditory warning sounds in the work environment [and Discussion]. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 327(1241), 485-492.
Preston, C.C., Colman, A.M. (2000). Optimal number of response categories in rating scales: reliability, validity, discriminating power, and respondent preferences. Acta Psychol. 104, 1–15.
Reder, P.J., Mccallum, C.A. (2004). Flexible mouse-driven method of user interface. U.S. Patent 6,727,919.
Reeves, L. M., Lai, J., Larson, J. A., Oviatt, S., Balaji, T. S., Buisine, S., ... & McTear, M. (2004). Guidelines for multimodal user interface design. Communications of the ACM, 47(1), 57-59.
Rousek, J.B., Hallbeck, M.S. (2011). Improving and analyzing signage within a healthcare setting. Appl. Ergon. 42, 771–784.
SAE International. (2008). Process for comprehension testing of in-vehicle icons (SAE J2830). SAE International, Warrendale, PA
SAE International. (1980). Symbols for motor vehicle controls, indicators and tell-tales (SAE J1048). SAE International, Warrendale, PA.
Sanders, M.S., & McCormick, E.J. (1993). Human Factors in Engineering and Design, 7th Edition, Singapore: McGraw-Hill.
Saunby, C.S., Farber, E.I., DeMello, J. (1988). Driver understanding and recognition of automotive ISO symbols, SAE Technical Papers 885182. Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA.
Sayer, J. R. and Green, P. (1998). Current ISO automotive symbols versus alternatives: a reference study, SAE Technical Papers 880057. Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA.
Sebeok, T. A. (2001). Signs: An introduction to semiotics. University of Toronto Press.
Shepard, R.N. (1967). Recognition memory for words, sentences, and pictures1. J. of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behav. 6, 156–163.
Shinar, D., & Compton, R. (2004). Aggressive driving: an observational study of driver, vehicle, and situational variables. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 36(3), 429-437.
Sodnik, J., Dicke, C., Tomažič, S., & Billinghurst, M. (2008). A user study of auditory versus visual interfaces for use while driving. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 66(5), 318-332.
Stotts, D.B. (1998). The usefulness of icons on the computer Interface: effect of graphical abstraction and functional representation on experienced and novice users. Proc. Hum. Factors. Ergon. Soc. Annu. Meet. 42, 453–457.
Suied, C., Susini, P., & McAdams, S. (2008). Evaluating warning sound urgency with reaction times. Journal of experimental psychology: applied, 14(3), 201.
Tabata, T., Konet, H., & Kanuma, T. (2011). Development of Nissan Approaching Vehicle Sound for Pedestrians: How to Solve the Trade Off between Quietness and Pedestrian Safety of the Electric Vehicles? (No. 2011-39-7231). SAE Technical Paper.
Tonnis, M., Broy, V., Klinker, G. (2006). A survey of challenges related to the design of 3D user interfaces for car drivers, in: 3D User Interfaces, 2006. 3DUI 2006. IEEE Symposium On. pp. 127–134.
United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE). (1972). Regulation No. 28 Uniform Provisions concerning the Approval of Audible Warning Devices and of Motor Vehicles with Regard to Their Audible Signals. Retrieved from http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/trans/main/wp29/wp29regs/r028e.pdf
Vukelich, M., Whitaker, L.A. (1993). The effects of context on the comprehension of graphic symbols, in: Proc. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Annu. Meet. pp. 511–515.
Wang, H.F., Hung, S.H., Liao, C.C. (2007). A survey of icon taxonomy used in the interface design, in: Proceedings of the 14th European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics: Invent! Explore!, ECCE ’07. ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp. 203–206.
Warr, P. (1994) Age and employment, in: H. C. Triandis, M. D. Dunnette and L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 2nd ed., Vol 4. Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto, CA, pp. 485-550
Weber, R. (1999). Interior car sound quality–assessment of acceleration noises. 2nd Forum Acusticum. Berlin, Germany.
Wiedenbeck, S. (1999). The use of icons and labels in an end user application program: an empirical study of learning and retention. Behav. Inf. Technol. 18, 68–82.
Wogalter, M. S., Kalsher, M. J., & Racicot, B. M. (1993). Behavioral compliance with warnings: Effects of voice, context, and location. Safety Science, 16(5), 637-654.
Wogalter, M.S., Silver, N.C., Leonard, S.D., Zaikina, H. (2006). Warning symbols, in: Wogalter, M.S. (Ed.), Handbook of Warnings. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.
Wolff, J.S., Wogalter, M.S. (1998). Comprehension of pictorial symbols: effects of context and test method. Hum. Factors 40, 173–186.
Yamauchi, K., Choi, J. D., Maiguma, R., Takada, M., & Iwamiya, S. I. (2004). A basic study on universal design of auditory signals in automobiles. Journal of physiological anthropology and applied human science, 23(6), 295-298.
Yost, W. A. (2009). Pitch perception. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 71(8), 1701-1715.
Yuan, J. (2014). The driver-focused Human Machine Interface. Retrieved from http://www.driverfocusedhmi.com/#research.