TY - JOUR
T1 - Airport Waiting Areas as Behavior Settings
T2 - The Role of Legibility Cues in Communicating the Setting Program
AU - Gibson, Bryan
AU - Werner, Carol
PY - 1994/6
Y1 - 1994/6
N2 - Three studies examined the impact of legibility on compliance with smoking regulations. Waiting areas at a large airport were viewed as behavior settings (R. G. Barker, 1968) in which smoking rules could be communicated more clearly by applying K. Lynch's (1960) notions of legibility. Study 1 identified 3 types of areas: clearly no smoking, clearly smoking permitted, and ambiguous. As predicted, ambiguous areas had significantly more smokers than clearly defined no-smoking areas. In Study 2, legibility was varied systematically: Both legibility and user location in the areas contributed to users' knowledge of the rules, and there were more smoking violations in illegible areas. Study 3 indicated that when smoking occurred in a no-smoking area, people were more likely to act as maintenance mechanisms when in a legible area and when in the center of the area. Furthermore, over time, in legible no-smoking areas they became more assertive, whereas in illegible no-smoking areas they tended to leave the area. Evidence suggests that visual cues can successfully communicate the setting program in the absence of setting leaders, and behavior setting research can benefit from an understanding of psychological processes underlying legibility.
AB - Three studies examined the impact of legibility on compliance with smoking regulations. Waiting areas at a large airport were viewed as behavior settings (R. G. Barker, 1968) in which smoking rules could be communicated more clearly by applying K. Lynch's (1960) notions of legibility. Study 1 identified 3 types of areas: clearly no smoking, clearly smoking permitted, and ambiguous. As predicted, ambiguous areas had significantly more smokers than clearly defined no-smoking areas. In Study 2, legibility was varied systematically: Both legibility and user location in the areas contributed to users' knowledge of the rules, and there were more smoking violations in illegible areas. Study 3 indicated that when smoking occurred in a no-smoking area, people were more likely to act as maintenance mechanisms when in a legible area and when in the center of the area. Furthermore, over time, in legible no-smoking areas they became more assertive, whereas in illegible no-smoking areas they tended to leave the area. Evidence suggests that visual cues can successfully communicate the setting program in the absence of setting leaders, and behavior setting research can benefit from an understanding of psychological processes underlying legibility.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=21344485925&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1037/0022-3514.66.6.1049
DO - 10.1037/0022-3514.66.6.1049
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:21344485925
SN - 0022-3514
VL - 66
SP - 1049
EP - 1060
JO - Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
JF - Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
IS - 6
ER -