WWW/Internet - Portal do Software Público Brasileiro

ISBN: 978-972-8939-25-0 © 2010 IADISthe thirdness to be safety. A rather obscure thirdness was also intended for the sign : that of e-mail service.The typical type-token relation lead 94.7% of the subject to attribute the more culturally conventionedmeaning of help. For 21.1% of the subjects meant the user profile (instead of the desired phone service);31.6% thought that , a pendrive, had a continuum of “save” (as opposed to product description); isclearly a computer for 31.6% of the subjects, not a sign for help; and meant product list for 26.3% of thesubjects (whereas the thirdness intended by the designer was that of services).4. ANAYSIS AND CONCLUSIONSThe set of signs, used in the major Brazilian e-commerce sites, analyzed here, is not suitable for functionalityrepresentations in such information systems. The signs used confuse the user into attributing dismalmeanings. Only 2 out of 29 signs lead to a thirdness attibution that was convergent with the intended one. 11lead the user to attibute a different meaning from that intended. And 16 failed completely in helping the userto converge on their meaning. Worst, these 16 signs lead the user to attibute, some times, the oppositemeaning. It was observed a lack of consistency even for the firstness for the traditional functions expected ina e-commerce site, such as sales (three different signs), safety (two) and information. These type-tokenrelation mistakes should be easily avoided.A lot of the meaning attribution discrepancies occurred because culturally conventioned signs were notused properly. 11 of the problems occurred in the thirdness (which is typical of symbols alreadyconsolidated). 7 occurred in the secondness (that shows a direct relation between the sign and its knownfunction). For example, rightly so, the users attributed the meaning of gifts to signs intended to show wrapingservices, wedding list, return policies, itens of a product etc. Gift was also the meaning of choice for signsintended to bring up the thirdness of delivery. Another example is the attribution of shopping to signs thatwere wrongly intended to mean safety, list, return policies, wish list, help. The magnifying glass and theinterrogation point are blatant examples of such disregard for culturally conventioned symbols.The lack of consistency also appeared when it is observed that for safe site, different signs such as lockand shield were used. As for more abstract concepts such as privacy policies, technical data, items of aproduct, partnerships, services, online support, among others, the signs didn´t quite convey a firstness to helpthe user to converge an abductive path to the intended meaning. The dollar sign, for instance, is clearly a signfor value, and not payment alternatives.Corroborating the findings in Pio & Guimarães (2008), the present study show that the signs used forfunctions and concepts in Brazilian e-commerce sites are not adequate. There appears to be a lack ofunderstanding of the importance such signs play in the overall success of the information system. A call for amore systematic construction and evaluation of signs is made.REFERENCES1. Carroll, J.M. et al., 1988. “Interface metaphors and ser interface design” In, Helander, M. (ed.) Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction. Elsevier Science Publishers, 67-85.2. Dertouzos, M. 1997. “O que será: como o mundo da informação transformará nossas vidas”. São Paulo: Cia dasLetras.3. de Souza, 2005. “The Semiotic Engineering of Human-Computer Interaction.” In: Capítulo 2, Fundamental Conceptsin Semiotics, MIT: MIT Press.4. Pio, F.; Guimarães, C., 2007. “E-commerce: Qual Ícone vale mais que mil palavras?” In: SBC/IV SMSI, 2007, Lavras.5. Umberto Eco, 1997. “Semiotica e filosofia del linguaggio”. Torino: Giulio Einaldi editore.372