{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.024193548387096774, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.478260869565218, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Methodological Issues in Testing Comprehension of Safety Symbols

Safety symbols must be tested prior to use to ensure that they are adequately understood, as failures to communicate can result in injury or death. However, factors other than symbol quality influence assessed comprehension level: These include test method, scoring method, as well as availability of context. Open-ended and multiple-choice test methods are compared and contrasted on a number of dimensions including ease of construction, administration, and scoring. While use of an open-ended test procedure is generally recommended, it is proposed that a modified multiple-choice test, in which alternatives are assessed across multiple trials, is an attractive alternative.