Cognitive Considerations in Display Design.

ABSTRACT This invegtigation of.the encoding features of graphs begins with a description of a cognitive framework which allows designers to factor into the process of 'designing displays how people interpret the information'found and what display properties are responsible for this interpretation. The framework also provides a performance measure for use in assessing alternative designs and cognitive effort. Properties of displays--features, dimensions, and,' configurations--that can-be mentally represented and serve as a basis for response are also discussed, as well as the strategy used to determine which display property is actually being represented and a processing jusiification for its use. An experiment is then described in detail which used a speeded classification task to test whether any of the display properties discussed were actually the encoding* features and to assess the.degree of interference in two univariate and two orthogonal conditions. It Was found that, if the display format was not compatible with the inforMation to be presented, classification errors increased, which in turn would increase the' likelihood of miscommunication at higher levels of processing. A 38-item bibliography, 7 figures, and 4 tables are attached. (LMM)-

[1]  W. R. Garner,et al.  Effects of focusing strategy on speeded classification with grouping, filtering, and condensation tasks , 1972 .

[2]  Daniel G Bobrow,et al.  On data-limited and resource-limited processes , 1975, Cognitive Psychology.

[3]  G. Lockhead.  Effects of dimensional redundancy on visual discrimination. , 1966, Journal of experimental psychology.

[4]  J. R. Pomerantz,et al.  Grouping by proximity: Selective attention measures , 1975 .

[5]  W. R. Garner,et al.  An Analysis of Redundancy in Perceptual Discrimination , 1962, Perceptual and motor skills.

[6]  Leo A. Goodman,et al.  A Modified Multiple Regression Approach to the Analysis of Dichotomous Variables , 1972 .

[7]  W. R. Garner,et al.  Integrality of stimulus dimensions in various types of information processing , 1970 .

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

[9]  H Egeth,et al.  Selective Attention , 2019, Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual Differences.

[10]  J. Deutsch,et al.  Attention: Some theoretical considerations. , 1963 .

[11]  F. Craik,et al.  Levels of Pro-cessing: A Framework for Memory Research , 1975 .

[12]  P. Holland,et al.  Discrete Multivariate Analysis. , 1976 .

[13]  J R Dykes,et al.  An investigation of the perceptual basis of redundancy gain and orthogonal interference for integral dimensions , 1978, Perception & psychophysics.

[14]  R. Shepard.  Attention and the metric structure of the stimulus space. , 1964 .

[15]  James R. Pomerantz,et al.  Stimules configuration in selective attention tasks , 1973 .

[16]  Howard G. Schutz,et al.  An Evaluation of Formats for Graphic Trend Displays—Experiment II1 , 1961 .

[17]  A. Tversky.  Features of Similarity , 1977 .

[18]  Hiroshi Ono,et al.  Difference threshold for stimulus length under simultaneous and nonsimultaneous viewing conditions , 1967 .

[19]  Howard G. Schutz,et al.  An Evaluation of Methods for Presentation of Graphic Multiple Trends—Experiment III1 , 1961 .

[20]  D. Kahneman,et al.  Attention and Effort , 1973 .

[21]  S. Imai,et al.  The free classification of analyzable and unanalyzable stimuli , 1972 .

[22]  H W HAKE,et al.  Multidimensional stimulus differences and accuracy of discrimination. , 1955, Journal of experimental psychology.

[23]  W. R. Garner.  The Processing of Information and Structure , 1974 .

[24]  Michael Macdonald-Ross,et al.  How numbers are shown , 1977 .

[25]  L. A. Goodman.  The Multivariate Analysis of Qualitative Data: Interactions among Multiple Classifications , 1970 .

[26]  M. Posner.  INFORMATION REDUCTION IN THE ANALYSIS OF SEQUENTIAL TASKS. , 1964, Psychological review.