Study of Icon Design for Indian Market: Preliminary Investigation

  • Madhura Sekar
  • Ganesh SadashivEmail author
  • Suneira Subramanian
  • Shreya Venkatesh
  • Viba Mohan
Conference paper
Part of the Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies book series (SIST, volume 135)


Icons on a product effectively communicate the actual functionality of the design. A poorly designed icon which fails to help its users understand about its functions not only affects the usability of the product but also directly reduces its acceptance in the market. More icons representing multi-functionalities of smart refrigerators have resulted in some of them becoming redundant due to lack of understanding by its users. Thus, empathizing with the target user groups in order to understand their needs and wants is a necessity which many existing icon designs fail to do. The study aims to evaluate the level of comprehension about these icons and the need to redesign or discard some of them by analyzing data through comprehension, stereotype, and strength test. Many of the present smart refrigerators carry icon designs, considering mental models of Western nation’s users and do not relate entirely to users of India.


Refrigerators Icon Buttons Comprehension test Icon design User interface Cross-cultural design 



This research was supported by PES University, Bengaluru, India.


  1. 1.
    Zender, M., Cassedy, A.: (mis)understanding: icon comprehension in different cultural contexts. 48(1) (2014) (University of Cincinnati)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    DubaCreative, Nate Hunzaker, Alla Kholmatova.: Are Hollow Icons Really Harder to Recognize Than Solid Icons? published in (2015)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hortan, W.K.: The Icon book: Visual Symbols for Computer Systems and Documentation, p. 417. Wiley, New York, NY, USA (1994)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Moyes, J., Jordan, P.W.: Icon design and its effect on guess ability and experienced user performance (published in People and Computers VIII), 7th Conference, pp. 49–59 (1993)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Islam, M.N.: Semiotics perception towards designing users’ intuitive web user interface: a study on interface signs. In: Knowledge and Technologies in Innovative Information Systems, 7th Mediterranean Conference on Information Systems, pp. 139–155, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (2012)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hassenzahl, M., Tractinsky, N.: User experience—research agenda (Published in Behaviour & information Technology). 25(2), 91–97 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Carr, T.H., Boff, K.R., Kaufman, L., Thomas, J.P.: Perceiving visual language. 2, 192 (1982). doi:1986-98619-005Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Galitz, W.O.: The Essential Guide to User Interface Design: An Introduction to Guide Design Principles and Technics, 3rd Edition, pp. 82–88. Wiley, 1st Apr 2007Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Reisner, P.: APT: A Description of User Interface Inconsistency. Int. J. Man Mach. Stud. 39, 215–236 (1993). Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jordan, P.W.: Consistency and usability. Ph.D thesis., p. 71 (1993)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Maguire, M.C.: A review of human factors guidelines and techniques for the design of graphical human-computer interfaces. Comput. Graph. 9(3), 221–235 (1985). Scholar
  12. 12.
    Piamonte, D.P.T., Abeysekera, J.D.A., Ohlsson, K.: Understanding small graphical symbols: a cross-cultural study. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 27(6), 304–399 (2001). Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Madhura Sekar
    • 1
  • Ganesh Sadashiv
    • 2
    Email author
  • Suneira Subramanian
    • 1
  • Shreya Venkatesh
    • 1
  • Viba Mohan
    • 1
  1. 1.PES UniversityBengaluruIndia
  2. 2.Department of DesignIIT DelhiDelhiIndia

Personalised recommendations