Human Behaviour 
towards signage 
(A Particular 
Case)  
A Short Research Paper 
for completion of 
subject  ‐ ARC 301 
Research Methodology 

Bhargav Kaushik, id: 
48200060, SoA+D, KMUTT 
 Human Behaviour towards signage (A Particular Case)  2008 

 
 

Contents 

Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 3

Research: Method ...................................................................................................................... 4

Research: Results ...................................................................................................................... 5

Comparison: Case 1................................................................................................................... 7

Comparison: Case 2................................................................................................................... 8

Comparison: Case 3................................................................................................................... 8

Conclusion: ................................................................................................................................ 9

Bibliography: ........................................................................................................................... 10

Bhargav Kaushik, id: 48200060, SoA+D, KMUTT 2 
 
 Human Behaviour towards signage (A Particular Case)  2008 

 
Introduction

“Cleanliness and order are not matters of instinct; they are matters of education, and like

most great things, you must cultivate a taste for them”. - Benjamin Disraeli a British

politician (1804 - 1881)

“Members of a family will keep their house clean, but they will not be interested in the

neighbour’s.” and “Every one must be his own scavenger.” – Mahatma (M.K.) Gandhi an

Indian Philosopher (1869 – 1948)

These above lines are for stimulating the motive behind the research, and of course

they do relate to the cause and effect of the particular human habit that is under scope in this

observation.

This paper is a visual investigation on an issue that relates to human behaviour and

precursory instruments. The specific location and the time of this observation are also taken

in consideration for synthesizing the phenomena. To be specific, the reader will find how a

group of people including: students, teachers and staff members of a university react; with

the presence of directive or instructive signs on their dining tables. The main focus of this

research is, how people respond to different types of signs: a) written, b) graphical, c) both

together and d) nothing. The observation is organised in a canteen area of a University by

using printed black and white paper signs, a digital camera and camcorder. This method

helps the researchers to analyse the activities in each table without any of the observant

noticing the study being done on them. However, it is quite difficult to show all of the field

data in the form of a paper, there will be some pictures from the footage which is made

available online; the address can be obtained from the bibliography. Research data analysis

is discussed below in details.

Bhargav Kaushik, id: 48200060, SoA+D, KMUTT 3 
 
 Human Behaviour towards signage (A Particular Case)  2008 

 
Research: Method

This is an experiment setup for discovering the effect of instructive signage textual or

graphical on people eating in a University canteen. People might have an unusual behaviour

if they were aware of this observation, so the activity of observation has to be hidden from

the observants. The observing cameras and camcorders are kept on a mezzanine floor

abutting the canteen hall space, where

people in general will not notice the activity.

The Figure 1 on right shows how the

equipment is located and recording the

actions of the observants. Hence, observants

were not aware of the study about their Figure 1: A sketch to explain the voyeuristic
position of the camera and observed tables.
behaviours. Signs are placed in the centre of each table, so that people of both sides of the

table can see the sign. There were only four tables under surveillance as only four type signs

are used. The tables are close to each other so that they were captured in the same frame. The

position of the tables can be seen as below.

The Noodle Stall |The Food Stall no. 1 |The Food Stall no. 2 

  Table  Table  Table  Table 

Some other 

Materials 
Shop 4 
Stalls 

Table  Table  Table  Table 

Table 2 Table 4 Table  Table 
Table 1 Table 3 Table  Table 
Access point with the ramp and Open Space before the 
steps to the campus walkways. 
Figure 2: This is a very simple representation of the canteen area and it shows which of the tables are being observed.

The observation is for finding the number of people using the tables, number of plates

and glasses left over the table after they left. The next series of tables represent the findings.

Bhargav Kaushik, id: 48200060, SoA+D, KMUTT 4 
 
 Human Behaviour towards signage (A Particular Case)  2008 

 
Research: Results

Table People Plate Bottle Table People Plate Bottle

cup cup

1
Total 6
2
1
3

0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0 2 6
2
-

8
0
4
-

4
4
0
-

4
Total
100% clean (Only Textual Sign) 50% clean (no signs at all)

Table People Plate Bottle Table People Plate Bottle

cup cup

3
Total
2
2
2

6
3
0
0

3
0
0
0

0
4
Total
3
4
2

9
0
0
0

0
0
0
0

0
75 % clean (Only Graphical Sign) 100 % clean (Text & Graphic both)

Figure 3: These four tables indicate the number of people who took a seat in these tables and left or took away their 
tableware after finishing their meals or snacks.  

The results in Figure 3 show that there is a difference in people’s response with

different signs - textual or graphical, or none at all. People in the Table 1 take away their

tableware every time they sit there, but in Table 2 four set of tableware are left when there

are eight people sitting. On table 4, no leftover table are seen but not on Table 3 some

observant left three plates which makes it 75% clean. From the above statistics one thought

has come up that Tables with textual instruction on it are more clear than the other

neighbouring tables with no or only graphical instructions. So, it is quite evident that, textual

instructions are more commanding than the graphical representation of a sought action.

There might be several reasons for this kind of behavioural change in people, which will be

discussed later in this paper. However, to discuss those reasons this small observation is not

Bhargav Kaushik, id: 48200060, SoA+D, KMUTT 5 
 
 Human Behaviour towards signage (A Particular Case)  2008 

 
enough, so some other papers with similar motive are also discussed before concluding the

findings.

As disclosed in the earlier paragraph, the behavioural changes in different tables

might be for various reasons. Certainly all the four tables do not have the same people to

have their lunch or snacks, and for every single person there are numbers of factors that make

them react to their surroundings. For instance, the people who sit on Table 1 be a bit more

socially responsible than the people on Table 2 and Table 3; or there might be a state of

urgency for the people in Table 2 and Table 3. These kinds of factors often dominate

people’s behavioural reactions to their surroundings. But since, the signs are there in the

tables we consider them to be seen by the observant, and there is not much scope for these

people to get affected by any other external entity after they have seen the signs. However,

there might be some kind of distractions, for example, conversation with the company, dogs

moving around or works to do along with eating. Then again, if the observant has seen the

signs at least for once, which is very obvious then, they are considered to recognise the signs

and behave accordingly. This explains that the observation is not on any other factor but on

effectiveness of signage (graphical or textual) for table manner instructions in a social

platform. So, it can be considered that this observation is focused on efficiency of signage in

graphical or textual form. Hungerford and Volk (1990) said that in environmental education

increase of knowledge changes human attitude and thus it turn changes their action. This

phenomenon they described with the help of a diagram, which is show in Figure 4, with

required modification to the relation of this study.

Signage as 
  Knowledge Attitude Action 
Reminder 
 
 
Figure 4: This figure shows how human behaviour changes, when knowledge is input, attitude is the thinking process 
and action is the final output. With signage (reminder) knowledge (previously acquired) has better impact on attitude 
and hence better action is produced.  
Bhargav Kaushik, id: 48200060, SoA+D, KMUTT 6 
 
 Human Behaviour towards signage (A Particular Case)  2008 

 
Comparison: Case 1

In the study of Jason and Liotta (1982), there were people who smoked in the public areas in

a university campus and the research team put some signage on tables and walls requesting to

keep that particular area smoke free. It is seen in the research paper that results were

dramatically different while using signage and signage along with verbal prompting.

“Signs can either prompt the occurrence of approach oriented

behaviours, or as in the present study, request the avoidance of

certain responses. The sign intervention brought about only

minimal changes to smoking behaviour. Although past research

has indicated that signs are not sufficient to influence newspaper

recycling, bus-ridership, and seat belt usage, simple sign prompts

have been effective in getting people to use special trash

receptacles, buy returnable bottles, turn off lights and avoid

stealing certain store items (Geller, Winett, & Everett, 1982;

Glanwick & Jason, 1980). Future research might be directed

towards determining the conditions that influence compliance and

non compliance to sign prompts.”

The paper concluded that people in that location acted responsibly and the rate of smoking

went down whenever there was a verbal prompting along with signage. It also says that

prompting should only occur with visible stipulation of rules governing the no-smoking are,

otherwise it might be an annoying unreasonable request to smoker if there is no signs

indicating that the area is a no-smoking zone. Jason & Liotta (1982)

Bhargav Kaushik, id: 48200060, SoA+D, KMUTT 7 
 
 Human Behaviour towards signage (A Particular Case)  2008 

 
Comparison: Case 2

In another study done by a group of computer scientist in Virginia, U.S.A., Somervel,

Chewar and McCrickard, (2002) it is found that textual display and graphical display are

individually effective for different use in computer application. In the platform of HCI

(Human Computer Interaction) these researchers search for the optimal display type for a

specific set of information. After going through a long process of data collection and analysis

the researchers found that graphical displays are good for presenting information that are not

required to be accurate or just for understanding; and the textual displays are recommended

for those information which should be accurate or has a use for subsequent process. They

gave an example

“For example, using a slow-text display is best for minimizing

monitoring latency for our computer load, but a fast graphic

display could prove best for electronically tracking wildlife.”

Therefore, textual display of information is differently viewed than the graphical ones.

Comparison: Case 3

Furthermore a study in United Kingdom by Chatterjee, Hounsell, Firmin and Bonsall

(1999); discusses about the route diversion caused by the VMS (Variable Message Signs)

recently used in the streets of London. The research team found that very few drivers have

changed their route in compliance with the information shown on VMS over the streets of

London. Even though the final results does not show much attractive conclusion but in the

analysis, it mentioned about the benefit of VMS and also has a short comparison with similar

survey done in another city in United Kingdom, which shows much better participation of

drivers in appreciation of the VMS.

Bhargav Kaushik, id: 48200060, SoA+D, KMUTT 8 
 
 Human Behaviour towards signage (A Particular Case)  2008 

 
Conclusion:

Concluding the paper, it is found that a group of university goers (students-teacher-

staff) respond to instructions or directions that are in formal style or without graphical

representation, which could be misinterpreted. In other words, it can also be summarized that

people in general are more attentive towards the rigid commands than ambiguous contents or

graphic. This may have happened due to many other factors acting upon the observant, for

instance: lack of time, distracting conversation with their company, deficiency in social

awareness, personal habits etc. As mentioned by Hungerford and Volk (1990), people in

general would act accordingly only if they are trained to do so. But the previous analysis

concentrated only to the extent of the signs put on the tables and the difference of observant’s

reaction towards the presence of the message as reminders. If said in simpler words: different

signs different results; which implies after further analysis that: written language is more

effective than graphical ones. In the later part where the above mentioned observation is

compared with other analogous studies in order to have a critical evaluation of the

experiment. As in Leonard A. Jason and Richard F. Liotta’s(1982) paper the verbal request is

more effective than the signs and on the other hand J. Somervell, C.M. Chewar, Scott D.

McCrickard,(2002) expressed a critical analysis on displays both textual and graphical for

working on computer applications. In addition to that, the VMS is also shown its

effectiveness in study done by Chatterjee, Hounsell, Firmin and Bonsall (1999). Furthermore

the phenomenon of this study is also tested on the podium of philosophical and psychological

theories to indicate the cause and effect of such behavioural change. Thus the difference is

evident and there are reasons for it too: clearer verdict would be that graphical representation

is useful for communicating ideas or showing statistics but textual or formal style of

information helps maintaining discipline because people take them more seriously.

Bhargav Kaushik, id: 48200060, SoA+D, KMUTT 9 
 
 Human Behaviour towards signage (A Particular Case)  2008 

 
Bibliography:

1. Jason Leonard A., & Liotta Richard F., ‘Reduction of Cigarette Smoking in a

Univeristy Caferteri’, (1982) Journal of Applied Behaviour Analysis

2. Somervell J., Chewar C.M., & McCrickard D. Scott, (2002) ‘Evaluating

Graphical vs Textual Displays in Dual Task Environment’, Computer Science

Department of Verginiya Polytechnic Institute and State University. 660 McBryde

Hall, Blacksburg, VA-24061

3. Hungerford Harold R., Volk Trudi L., (1990) ‘Changing Learner Behavior

Through Environmental Education, Environmental Education: A Component of

Sustainable Development, World Conference on Education for All – Meeting Basic

Leaning Needs

4. Chatterjee K., Hounsell N.B., Firmin P.E. and Bonsall P.W., (1999),

’Driver’s response to variable message sign information in London’ Transportation

Research Part C: Emerging Technologies , Volume 10, Issue 2, April 2002, Pages

149-169

Bhargav Kaushik, id: 48200060, SoA+D, KMUTT 10