Reception

Synonyms / Other Terms Used

Front Desk, Check-in, Registration, Admissions, Admissions Desk

Category

Services, Public Facilities, Processing Activities, Tourism, Travel, Health Care, Clinical Facilities, Administrative Services

Message / Function

For notice in general and to indicate the location of a reception, front desk, or check-in facility
Note: This referent is not intended for Baggage Check-in facilities

	Source	Description
	Klinik Floridsdorf	Frontal view of upper part of human figure, horizontal line below
	BS 8501:2002	Human figure walking towards person behind desk, both in side view
	EJP	Human figure at representation of desk/counter greeting another human figure
	CNIS	Standing human figure in front of desk/counter, another human figure behind desk
1)	Eco-Mo Foundation	Human figure at representation of desk/counter interacting with another human figure
	ISO 7001	Human figure at representation of desk/counter interacting with another human figure
3)	Formiga 2011	Three human figures of differing size in front of desk, another human figure behind desk
	AIGA	Figures exchanging rectangular object over a counter indicated by horizontal line
	HSSS	Standing human figure with case in front of desk/counter, another human figure behind desk
	Bolivia	Standing human figure with case in front of desk/counter, another human figure behind desk
	Adrien Coquet	Human figure at representation of desk/counter with cross, another person standing next to desk
2)	Olmstead	Side view of standing human figure writing, case, nurse behind desk
	Dreyfuss	Side view of standing human figure writing, upper part of human figure behind desk, child in foreground
	D'source	Side view of standing human figure writing, upper part of human figure behind desk
4)	SEGD/HJ	Side view of standing human figure writing, upper part of human figure behind desk
70	Hablamos Juntos	Upper part of human figure with tie reaching towards folders
50	Hablamos Juntos	Upper part of human figure with tie behind desk, folder symbol in top left corner
	Formiga 2011	Cross, typewriter below, upper part of human figure holding receiver, one hand holding pen
	Formiga 2011	Upper part of human figure behind desk, one arm reaching towards pen, cross symbol below
	Formiga 2011	Upper part of nurse behind desk, pen in holder on the left
	Aku-Johnson	Side view of hand holding pen
	Olmstead	Side view of hand holding pen
3)	NYCHHC	Tip of fountain pen
3)	Olmstead	Massive arrow pointing downwards on side view of hospital bed
	Health Icons	Open door with knob, inside square with rounded corners
	British Museum	Ticket with symbol plus perforation indicated by dotted line

Note: Some of the examples shown above were mirrored horizontally to contrast differences.

Discussion

A reception can be found in different places like hotels, hospitals, offices, for example, and serves as a welcoming area as well as point of contact for initial interaction. Often a reception incorporates several features, but basically visitor access is managed there. The multitude of terms from Admissions, Check-in, Front Desk, Reception, Registration is matched by the diversity of image contents available, and no single visual stereotype can be identified. As there is a significant semantic overlap between the rather specific referents Reception/Check-in/Admissions and the more general referent Administration, one cannot expect to find visual representations that clearly differentiate between these messages.

Studies from several countries present research covering most concepts found in pictogram variants for this referent, but with a strong focus on medical environments:

In a Japanese study to propose domestically unified graphical symbols based on scientific methods, the pictogram variant labeled as Eco-Mo Foundation and marked with 1) proved to be sufficiently comprehensible with a comprehension score of 73.9 (Eco-Mo Foundation, 2001).

Using Comprehensibility Estimates, Olmstead (1999) examined six pictogram variants of the table above regarding the referent Admissions. Among adult patients and visitors of medical facilities in the USA and China only the pictogram showing a standing human figure writing, next to a nurse behind a desk - labeled Olmstead and marked with 2) above - met the acceptance criterion in both samples.

Of a collection of fifteen pictograms for the referent Admissions, Formiga (2011) studied seven in detail using several established methods for evaluating pictograms. The variants marked with 3) consistently reached poor scores regarding the methods applied. In a table of symbols approved in at least two of the tests carried out, the AIGA symbol for Ticket Purchase is the only one left over from the selection examined for Admissions.

In a study of way-finding symbols for healthcare facilities in the United Arab Emirates the SEGD - Hablamos Juntos variant marked with 4) reached a score of 57 % correct only in a Comprehension Test carried out with a sample consisting mostly of young and well educated respondents (Hashim et al., 2014). This pictogram also was examined - among others - by Zender & Cassedy (2014) using the ISO/ANSI Open-ended Comprehension Test to find out if it is understood just as well in a different culture, and if not, why it failed. Test results from the United States and Tanzania reveal that this pictogram basically could work in the USA, as 67 % of the responses from the American sample were classified as correct. In the Tanzanian sample it became evident that this variant does not work everywhere: it was not understood among typical local patients with 5 % correct, and with 25 % correct only slightly better among respondents with advanced medical literacy. The failure was considered to be due to insufficient familiarity with this form of registration.

Hablamos Juntos in partnership with SEGD (the Society for Environmental Graphic Design) developed several test designs to signify Administration, of which five pictograms were subjected to a test on basis of the Comprehensibility Estimation procedure (Fontaine et al., 2010). With median scores ranging from 70 down to 20 none of the pictograms examined was judged as well comprehensible. The numbers next to the two pictograms labeled Hablamos Juntos in the table above are the median estimation scores reported for the corresponding pictograms in this study regarding Administration.

Recommendations

Due to the fact that data from research seems not completely sufficient, we recommend testing using the Comprehensibility Estimation procedure for eliminating poor variants and identifying the best of the set available, followed by a Comprehension Test. These studies should deliver useful data for recommending the best pictogram. Detailed information about the most frequent responses given in each of the response categories of the Comprehension Test should be provided to correctly judge comprehensibility and improve designs. To ensure top-quality and valid interpretation of results, also information concerning knowledge about this kind of facility or service should be collected at the end of the test.

Reception

Until then we recommend employing variants similar to Pictogram No A13 of the Eco-Mo Foundation shown above, as its use is not limited by additional elements like a suitcase or a symbol to indicate medical care.

Tests of pictograms of referent Reception

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.

Fontaine, L., Fernández, O., & Middleton, D. (2010): Universal Symbols in Health Care - Symbol Design Research Report. SEGD.

Formiga, E. (2011): Símbolos gráficos: métodos de avaliação de compreensão. São Paulo: Blucher.

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

Olmstead, W.T. (1999): The usability of symbols for health care facilities: the effect of culture, gender and age. In: Zwaga, H., Boersema, T. & Hoonhout, H. (Eds.): Visual information for everyday use. London: Taylor & Francis Ltd.

Zender, M., & Cassedy, A.E. (2014): (Mis)understanding: Icon Comprehension in Different Cultural Contexts. Visible Language, 48, 69.