Using Pictograms to Make Transit Easier to Navigate for Customers with Communication Barriers (2013)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

TCRP A-33A Final Report 4 SUMMARY The concept that picture-based messages could be effective tools to communicate during an emergency with transit riders, especially those with communication barriers, arose as part of the work for the Transportation Research Board study TCRP A-33: Communication with Vulnerable Populations: A Transportation and Emergency Management Toolkit (TCRP Report 150). That study and the resulting toolkit targeted transportation and emergency managers with guidance and tools for reaching people who would need transportation in an emergency and whose functional needs make them especially vulnerable (e.g., physical, cognitive, sensory disabilities; low- or no-English proficiency; aged or very young; or combinations of these). Working on the toolkit, the research team began to consider tools that would be effective during an emergency to help drivers and oSthers engaged with passengers to communicate with people who have communication barriers. Exploring the possibilities for pictograms led to a problem statement for follow-on work to TCRP A-33 and the pilot study described here. The scope of this study was small, intended to be a first inquiry into the potential for using pictograms as communication tools in emergencies. The visual iconography of the digital age has encouraged the global use of pictographs (information about objects or physical circumstances) and ideographs (information about concepts or behavior) and combinations of the two (e.g., a human figure on a step expresses “Step Up” or “Step Down,” or, by extension, “Watch Your Step.”). Many recent explorations of pictograms are available, especially related to graphic design, but discussions of transportation-related pictograms are almost entirely focused on wayfinding and locations. This study appears to be the first to explore whether transit riders in an emergency could and would respond to picture-based directions from a driver. The results of this study suggest the value of pictograms in emergency communications in buses and paratransit, and, indeed, the value for non-emergency circumstances, as well. Clearly, this study is just a first peek at the possibilities, with an enormous range of opportunities for further exploration. It is foreseeable that a set of universal pictograms could be developed for transit, as has been done by the Universal Health Symbols (UHS) project, which, in 2010, released 54 tested and understandable pictograms for use by healthcare institutions. A major difference in the UHS pictograms and those that would be needed for effective communication in transit is the difference between locating places and directing behavior. The UHS pictograms help explain, describe and locate things and places users of healthcare services would need to recognize (e.g., the emblem of a pair of eyeglasses could identify the vision clinic in a hospital). Pictograms could do some of that for transit, of course, but the focus of this study is the effectiveness of directing behavior, especially in an emergency, to guide people who have communication barriers and who might, therefore, be dependent on the image for information critical to their safety and well-being. Images were tested among both English-speakers and non-English-speakers, with one or two explanatory words below the image at three sites. At the last test site, the research team tested pictures without words among a group of all native English-speakers. Regardless of the use of words with the pictogram, the images most readily understandable to participants had a material element (e.g., “Turn Off Electronics,” “Stay In Your Seat”). The images participants found more difficult to decipher contained ideas or abstractions (e.g. “Help Is Coming”) or an emotional state (e.g., “Stay Calm”).

TCRP A-33A Final Report 5 The study had three fundamental components – a literature review; primary research with bus drivers and representatives of transit agencies and agencies serving vulnerable populations; development and testing of pictograms. Using the messages that bus drivers said would be most critical from their perspective, the research team developed and tested variations on each of a series of pictograms intended for use in a scenario where a bus was stopped. Although the team projected a scenario focused on a flood event, drivers responded with directions that could cover a range of circumstances that would cause a bus to be stopped, with various further circumstances possible, including delay, a change in route, or help arriving for passengers on a bus that would not be continuing to travel. This study was not directed at immediately life- threatening emergencies, such as fire or bomb threats, that would require immediate evacuation. However, one of the drivers at a test site reflected that even in dire emergencies, pictograms for “Danger,” “Look At the Driver,” “Turn Off Headphones” would be necessary to communicate with passengers. The study gained even more relevance than the team had anticipated when the work had been proposed because interviews with drivers revealed that MOST passengers have communication barriers when they are on a bus, due to the fact that they are tuned into digital devices, usually with headphones or ear buds. One driver estimated that 95 percent of the people who ride her routes have ear devices in use. The fact that passengers are tuned into personal electronics means that they cannot hear announcements any more than deaf or hard-of-hearing passengers could. Visual directions would help drivers get all passengers’ attention, as well as those with communication barriers such as limited English proficiency or deafness, and communicate to them simple directions and basic information. The pilot of the pictograms involved a bus driver’s holding up and showing the images to respondents who were on a parked bus. These tests occurred in four cities, selected to represent communities of different sizes and diverse populations of transit riders in different locales in the United States. Participants included passengers with low- and no-English proficiency, native English-speakers, deaf and hard of hearing, young adults who had developmental and/or cognitive disabilities, teens in headphones, regular transit riders, and even some people who had never ridden a public bus. Holding the tests in a bus provided useful information about not only the images themselves, but also their production values (size, line weight, etc.) and their effectiveness in that environment. Ten important results from the study are these: 1. Picture-based communication with bus transit riders is necessary, especially in emergencies, but also in ordinary travel, because many bus passengers are “incommunicado.” They are isolated from the driver and to a large degree from each other voluntarily by digital devices or cultural behaviors, or involuntarily, because of language, disability, or distraction (care-giving, pestering by other passengers, etc.). 2. Pictograms that are connected to material facts or objects are the easiest for most people to grasp.

TCRP A-33A Final Report 6 3. Pictograms that give directions that involve an object or person (e.g., headphones, the driver, “Stay In Your Seat”) were mostly well understood. 4. Pictograms that give directions about simple behaviors without a material object were more difficult to understand (e.g. “Listen”), but more people grasped them than not. 5. Pictograms about an idea (“Help Is Coming”) or an emotional state (“Stay Calm”) were the least understood. 6. Pictograms are useful for conveying authority. People responded to the images and reported that in an emergency, seeing pictograms held up by a driver would focus their attention. All participants in the study indicated they would do as the directions in a pictogram told them (if they could understand it). 7. Bus drivers want effective tools for communicating with passengers and would welcome pictograms as a useful addition. 8. Passengers want direction, especially in emergencies. Participants said they would be glad to have simple pictures available to explain some aspects of public transit in general, especially when they can’t understand the language spoken. Literature review research and previous experience of the team in pictogram testing suggest the value of adding one or two words describing the picture, e.g., “Look,” to aid in comprehension. 9. Pictograms that are immediately understandable are a valuable tool. Any that are difficult for most people to decipher add to confusion and could make an emergency situation more stressful for all involved. No pictograms should be put into use without careful testing. Substantial research is needed to take the idea of using pictograms for transportation into effective reality. 10. Previous familiarity with the images would be helpful to passengers (this reinforced research findings from other studies). Flyers or other educational tools to familiarize passengers with images that would be used in emergencies would be important for transit agencies to provide their publics. Overall, there is no doubt that pictograms can be effective for communication with transit passengers who have voluntary or involuntary communication barriers. The opportunities for further research and implementation of pictograms are myriad. The importance of this future inquiry to public transit in a multicultural, multi-lingual, diverse passenger environment and in a world where private digital devices are defining people’s behavior in public space cannot be overstated.