Restaurant

Synonyms / Other Terms Used

Eating Place, Food Service, Food, Local Cuisine, Gastronomy

Category

Services, Concessions, Commercial Facilities, Travel, Tourism

Message / Function

To indicate the location of restaurant facilities

	Source	Description
	D/FW	Plan view of fork, knife, and spoon in line with each other
	AIGA	Plan view of fork and knife in line with each other
	Eco-Mo Foundation	Plan view of fork and knife in line with each other
	ISO 7001	Plan view of fork and knife in line with each other
	DB 2017	Plan view of fork and knife in line with each other, placed on the left
	EJP	Plan view of fork and knife in line with each other
	Bolivia	Plan view of fork and knife in line with each other
	Museu Blau	Plan view of fork and spoon in line with each other
	KSA	Plan view of spoon and chopsticks in line with each other
	UIC 413 b	Plan view of crossed knife and fork
	Icograda	Plan view of crossed knife and fork
	BTA 1989	Plan view of crossed knife and fork
	RAC	Plan view of crossed knife (blade in outline) and fork
	RJ 2023	Plan view of crossed knife (blade in outline) and fork
	Tern	Crossed knife (blade in outline) and fork
	Tern	Plan view of crossed spoon and fork
	DER	Plan view of crossed spoon and fork
	Icograda	Plan view of knife and spoon in line with each other on the right hand of a plate segment
	O'72	Plan view of fork and knife in line with each other on the right hand of a plate segment
	Bolivia	Plan view of fork, plate, and knife
	ineltec	Plan view of fork, plate, and knife
	Expo 67	Plan view of fork, plate, and knife
	Icograda	Plan view of fork, plate with fried egg, and knife
	LVA	Plan view of fork, plate, knife, and spoon in line with each other
	S/TA	Plan view of fork, knife, and spoon in line with each other within circle
	O'64	Plan view of fork and knife in line with each other within circle
	Düsseldorf Airport	Plan view of fork, knife, and side view of glass in line with each other
	S.Lucia	Plan view of fork, knife, and side view of glass in line with each other
	Unknown	Plan view of fork and knife, cup below
	TAC	Plan view of fork and knife, side view of cup inbetween
	Dumbar-WH	Plan view of fork and knife, object with several dots (glass of beer?) inbetween
	Baden-Baden	Plan view of crossed fork and knife, chef's hood above
	Icograda	Dishes with wavy lines above to indicate heat
	Icograda	Human figure (waiter) with serviette, carrying tray with dish with wavy lines above to indicate heat
	Icograda	Human figure (waiter) carrying tray with dishes, one wavy lines above to indicate heat
	Icograda	Human figure (waitress) dish with cover
	Hungary 1979	Opening with human figure (waiter) with serviette, carrying tray with glass
	BTA 1989	Table with tablecloth, menu, bottle, and glass
	Peru 2016	Pot with handles, tilted cover, spoon

Discussion

The examples shown above are only a small selection from the wide range of pictograms and symbols for Restaurant that can be found in publications and guiding systems worldwide. We left out the many variations of cutlery available and included just a few, especially if they were presented in the tests mentioned below.

Several studies present research covering numerous pictogram variants for this referent. These papers offer useful information:

Gehringer (1979) used the Production Method to explore which mental images or visual stereotypes exist concerning the message 'Restaurant'. The results were even more heterogeneous than the selection shown above with one concept dominating: fork, knife, spoon, and plate were drawn by 60 % of the respondents. The other images were: food and drinks (18 %), a house with table and food (7 %), and crossed cutlery inside a house (7 %). 8 % of the respondents produced either nothing or images that could not be used to derive any hints or ideas.

Results from a Comprehension Test conducted in countries on several continents (Easterby & Graydon, 1981 b) indicate that most representations shown above should be well understood. This is for example confirmed by the results of a Japanese study to propose domestically unified graphical symbols based on scientific methods, the pictogram variant labeled as Eco-Mo Foundation proved to be extraordinarily well comprehensible with a comprehension score of 98.6 (Eco-Mo Foundation, 2001), and from a study from Brazil, where 96 % of the answers could be classified as correct for a pictogram showing a crossed knife and fork similar to the corresponding Icograda variant above (Fiori, 2008).

In a Matching Test with a set of 29 symbols (Zwaga & Boersema, 1983) the variant from the Dutch Railways, an older version of the UIC variant shown above, reached 55 % correct responses only. Symmetrical confusions of the two referents Restaurant and Buffet happened quite frequently as there is a significant semantic overlap between the messages Restaurant and Buffet /Cafe.

The AIGA pictogram shown in the table above was one of the general purpose symbols examined in a study of way-finding symbols for healthcare facilities conducted in the United Arab Emirates. With 100 % of the answers classified as correct it was perfectly understood in a Comprehension Test carried out with a sample consisting mostly of young and well educated respondents (Hashim et al., 2014).

Notwithstanding the wide use of the crossed knife and fork in many countries and the excellent comprehension scores in the tests mentioned, it should be regarded that the X shape also might have some negative connotation as two crossed bars like an X are also used to indicate negations. On the other hand, the crossed cutlery may create an entity and fills space better than cutlery in line with each other.

Recommendation

We recommend the use of a simple pictogram variant with either fork and knife like referent PI CF 001 from ISO 7001 or the AIGA variant shown in the table above, or spoon and fork in line with each other.

Tests of pictograms of referent Restaurant

Easterby, R.S. & Graydon, I.R. (1981 a): Evaluation of Public Information Symbols: ISO Test: 1979/80 Series. Part I: Appropriateness Ranking Tests. AP Report 99, Applied Psychology Department, University of Aston in Birmingham, January 1981.

Easterby, R.S. & Graydon, I.R. (1981 b): Evaluation of Public Information Symbols: ISO 1979/80 Test Series. Part II: Comprehension/Recognition Tests. AP Report 100, Applied Psychology Department, University of Aston in Birmingham, January 1981.

Eco-Mo Foundation (2001): Test data of public information symbols in Japan - Procedure for the testing of public information symbols by the Study Committee. ISO: ISO/TC 145/SC 1 N 329.

Fiori, S. R. (2008): Mapas para o turismo e a interatividade - proposta teórica e prática. Tese de Doutorado - Depto. de Geografia, FFLCH-USP.

Gehringer, J. (1979): Untersuchung über die zeichnerische Gestaltung von Pictogrammen in Abhängigkeit von einigen Persönlichkeitsmerkmalen, sowie Überprüfung einiger Bildzeichen auf ihre Erkennbarkeit. Dissertation, Psychology Department, University of Vienna.

Hashim, M. J., Alkaabi, M. S., & Bharwani, S. (2014): Interpretation of way-finding healthcare symbols by a multicultural population: navigation signage design for global health. Applied ergonomics, 45(3), 503–509. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2013.07.002

Zwaga, H.J. & Boersema, T. (1983): Evaluation of a set of graphic symbols. Applied Ergonomics, 14, 1, 43-54.