Information Processing and Perceptual Characteristics of Display Design: The Role of Emergent Features and Objects

Abstract : In this report, the fundamental theoretical and applied principles are outlined, which have been cited to justify the relative benefits of object displays, the representation of several quantitative variables as features of single geometric objects. In particular, the proximity compatibility principle is described, which asserts that object displays will facilitate information integration tasks but will disrupt tasks that require focused attention on the individual dimensions of the object. Finally, an experiment is described contrasting three displays: a monochrome object, a multicolor object, and a separated bar graph display. Subjects were required to either integrate or focus attention on one of three sources of displayed information in an aircraft stall judgment task. Evaluation of the monochrome object revealed superior integration performance but degraded focused attention performance relative to the bar graph display, thus illustrating the proximity compatibility principle. The multicolored object, in contrast, emerged as a display concept that could potentially support accurate integration and focused attention performance, highlighting the role of emergent features and color coding, and suggesting some modifications of the proximity compatibility principle. The results are discussed in terms of their theoretical and practical application to multi- element interface design. (kr)

[1]  Mary Anne Buttigieg,et al.  Object Displays Do Not Always Support Better Integrated Task Performance , 1989 .

[2]  Robert J. K. Jacob,et al.  The Face as a Data Display , 1976 .

[3]  Paul Slovic,et al.  Graphic Representation of Judgmental Information , 1987 .

[4]  Kim J. Vicente,et al.  On Applying the Skills, Rules, Knowledge Framework to Interface Design , 1988 .

[5]  Jack A. Adams Human Factors Engineering , 1961 .

[6]  Lawrence C. Sager,et al.  Perception of wholes and of their component parts: some configural superiority effects. , 1977, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[7]  T S Tullis,et al.  The Formatting of Alphanumeric Displays: A Review and Analysis , 1983, Human factors.

[8]  C. Wickens,et al.  Dissociation of Performance and Subjective Measures of Workload , 1988 .

[9]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  The Display of Multivariate Information: The Effects of Auto and Cross- Correlation, Reliability, and Heterogeneity , 1987 .

[10]  W. R. Garner,et al.  The Stimulus in Information Processing , 1970 .

[11]  Anne Treisman,et al.  Properties, Parts, and Objects , 1986 .

[12]  David Woods,et al.  An Evaluation of Nuclear Power Plant Safety Parameter Display Systems , 1981 .

[13]  Bruce G. Coury,et al.  Classification of Multidimensional Data under Time Constraints: Evaluating Digital and Configural Display Representations , 1987 .

[14]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  Comparative Graphics: History and Applications of Perceptual Integrality Theory and the Proximity Compatibility Hypothesis , 1988 .

[15]  Susan Palmiter,et al.  Evaluation Metrics and a Tool for Control Panel Design , 1987 .

[16]  Bruce G. Coury,et al.  The Bargraph as a Configural and a Separable Display , 1988 .

[17]  J S Lappin,et al.  Attention in the identification of stimuli in complex visual displays. , 1967, Journal of experimental psychology.

[18]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  Proximity Compatibility and Information Display: The Effects of Space and Color on the Analysis of Aircraft Stall Conditions , 1989 .

[19]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  Information integration and the object display An interaction of task demands and display superiority , 1987 .

[20]  D. Kahneman,et al.  Tests of the automaticity of reading: dilution of Stroop effects by color-irrelevant stimuli. , 1983, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[21]  J. Duncan Selective attention and the organization of visual information. , 1984, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[22]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  The Perceptual Interaction of Graphical Attributes in Thirteen Bivariate Displays , 1989 .

[23]  Arthur F. Kramer,et al.  Display Format and the Perception of Numerical Data , 1986 .

[24]  C D Wickens,et al.  Resources, Confusions, and Compatibility in Dual Axis Tracking: Displays, Controls, and Dynamics , 1989, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[25]  Dennis B. Beringer Peripheral integrated status display , 1987 .

[26]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  Display Proximity in Multicue Information Integration: The Benefits of Boxes , 1988 .

[27]  C D Wickens,et al.  The perceptual interaction of graphical attributes: Configurality, stimulus homogeneity, and object integration , 1990, Perception & psychophysics.

[28]  C. Melody Carswell Graphical Information Processing: The Effects of Proximity Compatibility , 1990 .

[29]  I. Rock,et al.  Perceptual organization and attention , 1992, Cognitive Psychology.

[30]  Dennis B. Beringer,et al.  A Comparison of Shape/Object Displays, Quasi Shape Displays, and Conventional Univariate Indicators: Integration Benefits or the “Nearer to Thee” Effect? , 1987 .

[31]  J. R. Pomerantz Global and local precedence: selective attention in form and motion perception. , 1983, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[32]  C D Wickens,et al.  Processing of stimulus properties: evidence for dual-task integrality. , 1985, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[33]  Emilie M. Roth,et al.  Cognitive Engineering: Human Problem Solving with Tools , 1988 .

[34]  W. G. Cole Medical cognitive graphics , 1986, CHI '86.