In-Vehicle Display Icons and Other Information Elements: Literature Review

Carney, Cher; Campbell, John L.; Mitchell, Elizabeth A. · 1998 · ROSA P / Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

Get this paper ↗ (full text — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This report, produced by the Battelle Human Factors Transportation Center for the Federal Highway Administration, serves as the analytical foundation for developing human factors design guidelines for in-vehicle display icons and information elements. The research was motivated by the rapid deployment of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), such as Advanced Traveler Information Systems (ATIS) and Collision Avoidance Systems (CAS). The authors identified a critical gap: without standardized design guidance, in-vehicle information systems risk presenting contradictory, confusing, or distracting information to drivers, potentially compromising safety through driver overload and violated expectations. The methodology consisted of a comprehensive literature review (Task A of a larger project). Researchers examined over 200 articles, several books, and more than 100 websites, drawing from Battelle’s previous guideline development efforts, extensive database searches, and internet sources. The review focused on icon definitions, symbol recognition models, the effects of symbol mode and content, driver information requirements, current manufacturer usage, evaluation practices, and existing standards from organizations like ISO, SAE, and the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices. The analysis yielded five primary conclusions. First, the absence of specific guidelines has led to "design by consensus," resulting in a lack of scientific rigor and multiple icons for identical messages. Second, existing literature and standards offer little practical guidance for designing new icons for in-vehicle devices. Third, while general design principles (e.g., structure, shape, color) are sufficient to avoid creating ineffective icons, they are too vague to support the development of optimal icons, particularly regarding how to match specific graphic elements to driver information needs. Fourth, developing effective new icons requires iterative testing and evaluation, for which existing methods provide sufficient scientific rigor. Finally, despite industry concerns about the utility of human factors guidelines, proven methods for their development exist and will be utilized in subsequent project phases. The significance of this work lies in establishing a rigorous, evidence-based foundation for future icon design standards. By identifying the limitations of current "consensus-based" design and the insufficiency of general principles, the report justifies the need for specific, empirically derived guidelines. It confirms that while current evaluation methods are adequate, the industry must move toward iterative, scientifically grounded processes to ensure that in-vehicle displays enhance rather than hinder driver safety and comprehension.

Key finding

The lack of specific guidelines and standards for in-vehicle icons has resulted in design by consensus and a lack of scientific rigor, while existing general design principles are insufficient for developing optimal icons, making iterative testing essential.

Methodology

review

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed. Discovered via bulk_ingest_rosap on 2026-05-23 (6 acquisition events logged).

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-10; verification: verified.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

• ehmi external hmi
• signage environment
• vru facing ehmi
• display design
• hud ar windshield
• in vehicle displays

Information type

What kind of knowledge this paper contributes, grouped by family — independent of topic (what it is about) and method (how it was studied).

• Applied Guidance: design guidelines