 |
A project to make businesses more aware of their customer experience, and how to fix it. By Mark Hurst. |
| About Mark Hurst | Mark's Gel Conference | New York Times Story on This Is Broken | Newsletter: Subscribe | RSS Feed |
Search this site:
Categories:
- Advertising
- Current Affairs
- Customer Service
- Fixed
- Food and Drink
- Just for Fun
- Misc
- Not broken
- Place
- Product Design
- Signs
- Travel
- Web/Tech
Previous: Pedestrian walk signal | Main | Next: Wine cork warning label
April 30, 2004 12:01 AM
Broken: Pedestrian experiment
Dave Lawrence writes:
The image shows a sign in Cambridge Circus-- a very busy intersection in the middle of London. The sign reads, "Pedestrian Casualty Reduction Signal Timings Experiment." What does that mean? Is it safe for me to cross the street?
Sounds straightfoward to me. They're experimenting with the amount of time between the traffic light changes to see if they can reduce the number of pedestrians getting killed or injured at the intersection.
You should probably check both ways even if you have the "WALK" signal just to make sure the traffic is actually stopping.
The fact that the sign has been bent back is distinctly worrying though.
Long compound nouns like this are inherently hard to understand, as the brain has to keep pushing words onto the stack until it reaches the terminal noun-part and can unwind to interpret the entire thing. It's a fair bet that most people read this two or three times before they actually figure out what it means.
See also "long term car park courtesy car pick-up point".
For some reason it also reminds me of the attempted Bayesian filtering counter-attack in which spam contains lots of random, unconnected dictionary words...
Re: the 'WALK' comment - one aspect of UK traffic lights is that they don't use words, they use icons - a green man walking for 'WALK', a red man standing for 'DON'T WALK'. Seems more logical.
The green and red man signs are in all Europe. That's just American ("very descriptive") way of saying to stop ("DON'T WALK"). I guess someone would sue traffic lights comitee if there were a fred man instead. They wouldn't be able to understand what does the red man mean.
The green and red man signs are in whole Europe. That's just American ("very descriptive") way of saying to stop ("DON'T WALK"). I guess someone would sue traffic lights comitee if there were a red man instead. They wouldn't be able to understand what does the red man mean.
If someone sued for having a red man instead of "Don't Walk", I would personally go over to that persons house and hit them repeatedly over the head with a baseball bat.
thats cause there are so many immigrants invading our country (not that i mind them, i just mind that they dont takie the time to learn our language, and insist on having everything here translated into thiers.
Hi... I don't understand the entry about the immigrants - we've always had the little green and red men over here in Germany, even when there were hardly any citizens from foreign cultural backgrounds living here permanently.
By the way - "invading our country" ?!? Are you afraid of immigrants, Will? ;-)
Our language? What language is our language Will? As far as I remember, we didn't have an official national language in this country. And, yes, I have noticed more and more icon-type walk signs in the US.
Red HAND makes sense, red MAN does not. A red man could mean only sunburned people can cross the street.
Although Brian is making a joke, he's right in principle. A red man could be misunderstood ("is he walking or standing?") by someone that either could not understand the meaning of the colors, or could not see the colors. A hand (often a universal symbol for "stop") versus a figure walking is perhaps a little more intuitive for someone who might not understand the colors, or even the meaning of the symbols.
I like that everyone here sounds so educated and informed, because in general, you get the idea that most Americans are not.
(This is said in reference to Will's comment and his replies.)
Ok. How about the sign I have seen in NH, USA is a waving hand for go, and a stationary hand for stop. Even us Canadians understand that when we visit the USA. Don't remember if they were in color though....
We are lacking in a standard set of international signs. Some countries like US, Canada, Mexico, Brazil, Puerto Rico, Bahammas uses the red HAND. While other countries use the red MAN. A Uniform set of signs would release the problem of people not understanding walk signals.
Instead of a red hand or man, they should just have a picture of a guy under a car.
That sign is very unnerving.
How did this go from people comenting on a sign to people arguing about Walk/Don't Walk symbols? I personally think the sign, while its meaning may be clear to some people, would be confusing for most. The fact that it is bent backwards is also disturbing. I would not cross that street for anything.
I got the impression that they are experimenting with the crosswalks safety controls. If I cross there I am being used as a guinea pig so they can see whether or not I get killed.
why do we even need walk/don't walk signs? are people honestly so stupid that they need a sign to tell them when a car is coming?
Comments on this entry are closed
Previous: Pedestrian walk signal | Main | Next: Wine cork warning label
Why is it bent?! I wouldn't cross.
Posted by: Bradley Dean at April 30, 2004 01:28 AM