Options for labelling circular products: Icon design and consumer preferences

Abstract The demand of products that incorporate circular requirements depend on consumer perceptions. So effective communication is necessary between the product and consumers through product labelling. The use of specific icons facilitates this communication. This study presents a methodology for identifying the icons that best associate and identify consumers with the different design requirements that a circular product should meet. To do this, a set of icons for each circular requirement (upgrade, disassembly, lifetime extension, repairability and reuse) is presented to a representative sample of consumers who select the preferred one by taking into account different icon characteristics (simplicity, familiarity, semantic distance and aesthetic appeal). To validate the comprehension of the selected icons, ISO 9186-3 was applied to test the association of the selected icons with their corresponding requirement. Multinomial regression models were applied to explore whether any significant differences appeared among the responses obtained (icon selection) by the different respondent profiles. The most significant socio-economic variables were gender and age, while the most significant icon characteristics were semantic distance and aesthetic appeal. The results of this study could be useful for the companies committed to integrate the principles of circular economy into their product design since the use of selected icons can help consumers to identify them. Consumers' understanding is ensured due to the high percentages of correct answers obtained in the validation test (>85%).

[1]  Ya-Hsien Ko,et al.  The effects of luminance contrast, colour combinations, font, and search time on brand icon legibility. , 2017, Applied ergonomics.

[2]  Javad Abbaspour,et al.  The Relation between the Complexity and Semantic Distance of Icons and their Effectiveness in Digital Libraries , 2017 .

[3]  Dimitrios Zevgolis,et al.  The Importance of Mobile Interface Icons on User Interaction , 2012, Int. J. Comput. Sci. Appl..

[4]  Paraschos Maniatis,et al.  Investigating factors influencing consumer decision-making while choosing green products , 2016 .

[5]  Xin Li,et al.  Effects of the aesthetic design of icons on app downloads: evidence from an android market , 2017, Electron. Commer. Res..

[6]  Lei Zhou,et al.  Study on the Effects of Semantic Memory on Icon Complexity in Cognitive Domain , 2016, HCI.

[7]  James E. Bartlett,et al.  Organizational research: Determining appropriate sample size in survey research , 2001 .

[8]  Martin B. Curry,et al.  Icon Identification in Context: The Changing Role of Icon Characteristics With User Experience , 2007, Hum. Factors.

[9]  Andrea K. Moser Consumers' purchasing decisions regarding environmentally friendly products: An empirical analysis of German consumers , 2016 .

[10]  Noel Sheehy,et al.  Measuring icon complexity: An automated analysis , 2003, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[11]  Pertti Saariluoma,et al.  Effects of menu structure and touch screen scrolling style on the variability of glance durations during in-vehicle visual search tasks , 2011, Ergonomics.

[12]  Joseph A. Cote,et al.  Guidelines for Selecting or Modifying Logos , 1998 .

[13]  Russell B. Clayton,et al.  Establishing a Factor Model for Aesthetic Preference for Visual Complexity of Brand Logo , 2018 .

[14]  Michael T. Ewing,et al.  Aesthetic theory and logo design: examining consumer response to proportion across cultures , 2007 .

[15]  Martin B. Curry,et al.  Measuring symbol and icon characteristics: Norms for concreteness, complexity, meaningfulness, familiarity, and semantic distance for 239 symbols , 1999, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[16]  Suziah Sulaiman,et al.  The Effects of Icon Characteristics on Users' Perception , 2013, IVIC.

[17]  Tuomo Kujala,et al.  Semantic distance as a critical factor in icon design for in-car infotainment systems. , 2017, Applied ergonomics.

[18]  P Cavanagh,et al.  Familiarity and pop-out in visual search , 1994, Perception & psychophysics.

[19]  Sarah Isherwood Graphics and Semantics: The Relationship between What Is Seen and What Is Meant in Icon Design , 2009, HCI.

[20]  Sabrina Bresciani,et al.  New brand logo design: customers’ preference for brand name and icon , 2017 .

[21]  Chorng-Shiuh Koong,et al.  Icon Design Principles for Preschoolers: Implications Derived from Child Development , 2012 .

[22]  Martin Böcker A multiple index approach for the evaluation of pictograms and icons , 1996, Comput. Stand. Interfaces.

[23]  Hung-Yuan Chen,et al.  Integrating Conjoint Analysis with TOPSIS Algorithm to the Visual Effect of Icon Design Based on Multiple Users' Image Perceptions. , 2017 .

[24]  Michael D. Byrne,et al.  Using icons to find documents: simplicity is critical , 1993, INTERCHI.

[25]  Irene Reppa,et al.  What makes icons appealing? The role of processing fluency in predicting icon appeal in different task contexts. , 2016, Applied ergonomics.

[26]  Gerry Mulhern,et al.  Confounds in pictorial sets: The role of complexity and familiarity in basic-level picture processing , 2008, Behavior research methods.

[27]  Shih-miao Huang,et al.  Factors affecting the design of computer icons , 2002 .

[28]  Ratna Sari Dewi,et al.  The perceived quality of in-vehicle auditory signals: a structural equation modelling approach , 2017, Ergonomics.

[29]  Niki Hynes,et al.  Colour and meaning in corporate logos: An empirical study , 2009 .

[30]  Jussi P. P. Jokinen,et al.  Aesthetic Appeal and Visual Usability in Four Icon Design Eras , 2016, CHI.

[31]  Andreas Sonderegger,et al.  The influence of design aesthetics in usability testing: effects on user performance and perceived usability. , 2010, Applied ergonomics.