GraphCom: A multidimensional measure of graphic complexity applied to 131 written languages

We report a new multidimensional measure of visual complexity (GraphCom) that captures variability in the complexity of graphs within and across writing systems. We applied the measure to 131 written languages, allowing comparisons of complexity and providing a basis for empirical testing of GraphCom. The measure includes four dimensions whose value in capturing the different visual properties of graphs had been demonstrated in prior reading research—(1) perimetric complexity, sensitive to the ratio of a written form to its surrounding white space (Pelli, Burns, Farell, & Moore-Page, 2006); (2) number of disconnected components, sensitive to discontinuity (Gibson, 1969); (3) number of connected points, sensitive to continuity (Lanthier, Risko, Stolz, & Besner, 2009); and (4) number of simple features, sensitive to the strokes that compose graphs (Wu, Zhou, & Shu, 1999). In our analysis of the complexity of 21,550 graphs, we (a) determined the complexity variation across writing systems along each dimension, (b) examined the relationships among complexity patterns within and across writing systems, and (c) compared the dimensions in their abilities to differentiate the graphs from different writing systems, in order to predict human perceptual judgments (n = 180) of graphs with varying complexity. The results from the computational and experimental comparisons showed that GraphCom provides a measure of graphic complexity that exceeds previous measures in its empirical validation. The measure can be universally applied across writing systems, providing a research tool for studies of reading and writing.

[1]  Stuart Barber,et al.  All of Statistics: a Concise Course in Statistical Inference , 2005 .

[2]  Vivian Cook,et al.  Chapter 1: An Introduction to Researching Second Language Writing Systems , 2005 .

[3]  Katsuo Tamaoka,et al.  The effects of visual complexity for Japanese kanji processing with high and low frequencies , 2013 .

[4]  Carol A. Fowler,et al.  Brāhmī-derived orthographies are typologically Āksharik but functionally predominantly alphabetic , 2014 .

[5]  Andrew B. Watson,et al.  Perimetric Complexity of Binary Digital Images Notes on Calculation and Relation to Visual Complexity , 2011 .

[6]  Catherine McBride-Chang,et al.  Discourse-Level Reading Comprehension in Chinese Children: What Is the Role of Syntactic Awareness?. , 2014 .

[7]  W. C. Watt Curves as Angles , 1994 .

[8]  Jon Sprouse A validation of Amazon Mechanical Turk for the collection of acceptability judgments in linguistic theory , 2010, Behavior research methods.

[9]  Judith F. Kroll,et al.  The roles of study-abroad experience and working-memory capacity in the types of errors made during translation , 2004, Bilingualism: Language and Cognition.

[10]  J. Ziegler,et al.  Reading acquisition, developmental dyslexia, and skilled reading across languages: a psycholinguistic grain size theory. , 2005, Psychological bulletin.

[11]  David G. Rand,et al.  The online laboratory: conducting experiments in a real labor market , 2010, ArXiv.

[12]  Ben Fry,et al.  Getting Started with Processing , 2010 .

[13]  Rebecca Treiman,et al.  Young Children's Knowledge of the Symbolic Nature of Writing. , 2016, Child development.

[14]  Catherine McBride,et al.  Chinese Kindergartners Learn to Read Characters Analytically , 2015, Psychological science.

[15]  I. Biederman Recognition-by-components: a theory of human image understanding. , 1987, Psychological review.

[16]  Taeko N. Wydell,et al.  Dyslexia - A Comprehensive and International Approach , 2012 .

[17]  Rebecca Treiman,et al.  How Children Learn to Write Words , 2014 .

[18]  S. Dehaene,et al.  The role of invariant line junctions in object and visual word recognition , 2009, Vision Research.

[19]  Mark S. Seidenberg,et al.  Reading in different writing systems: One architecture, multiple solutions. , 2011 .

[20]  R. Treiman,et al.  Learning to spell in an alphasyllabary: The case of Kannada , 2010 .

[21]  C. McBride-Chang,et al.  Correlates of Chinese kindergarteners’ word reading and writing: the unique role of copying skills? , 2014 .

[22]  Charles A. Perfetti,et al.  Visual complexity in orthographic learning: Modeling learning across writing system variations , 2016 .

[23]  Li-Yun Chang VISUAL ORTHOGRAPHIC VARIATION AND LEARNING TO READ ACROSS WRITING SYSTEMS , 2015 .

[24]  O. Schwartz,et al.  The impact on midlevel vision of statistically optimal divisive normalization in V1. , 2013, Journal of vision.

[25]  J. Grainger,et al.  Letter perception: from pixels to pandemonium , 2008, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[26]  Rebecca Treiman,et al.  Similarities Among the Shapes of Writing and Their Effects on Learning. , 2011, Written language and literacy.

[27]  E. Lehmann Testing Statistical Hypotheses , 1960 .

[28]  David R. Anderson,et al.  Model selection and multimodel inference : a practical information-theoretic approach , 2003 .

[29]  Masataka Watanabe,et al.  Human Neuroscience Original Research Article Awareness of Central Luminance Edge Is Crucial for the Craik-o'brien-cornsweet Effect , 2022 .

[30]  Michael D. Buhrmester,et al.  Amazon's Mechanical Turk , 2011, Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

[31]  K. Grill-Spector,et al.  The human visual cortex. , 2004, Annual review of neuroscience.

[32]  D. Hubel,et al.  Receptive fields, binocular interaction and functional architecture in the cat's visual cortex , 1962, The Journal of physiology.

[33]  Won Mok Shim,et al.  Visual working memory for line orientations and face identities , 2008, Perception & psychophysics.

[34]  Shinsuke Shimojo,et al.  Character complexity and redundancy in writing systems over human history , 2005, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[35]  Shane T. Mueller,et al.  Alphabetic letter identification: effects of perceivability, similarity, and bias. , 2012, Acta psychologica.

[36]  Qiong Zhang,et al.  The Structures of Letters and Symbols throughout Human History Are Selected to Match Those Found in Objects in Natural Scenes , 2006, The American Naturalist.

[37]  D. Bub,et al.  Features for Identification of Uppercase and Lowercase Letters , 2008, Psychological science.

[38]  K. Koffka Principles Of Gestalt Psychology , 1936 .

[39]  Peter T. Daniels,et al.  Fundamentals of Grammatology , 1990 .

[40]  Iris Levin,et al.  How is emergent writing based on drawing? Analyses of children's products and their sorting by children and mothers. , 2003, Developmental psychology.

[41]  W. Bright International Encyclopedia of Linguistics , 1993 .

[42]  Sonali Nag,et al.  Alphabetism and the science of reading: from the perspective of the akshara languages , 2014, Front. Psychol..

[43]  Evan F. Risko,et al.  Not all visual features are created equal: early processing in letter and word recognition , 2009, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[44]  D C Van Essen,et al.  Information processing in the primate visual system: an integrated systems perspective. , 1992, Science.

[45]  T. Kargin,et al.  READING IN DIFFERENT ORTHOGRAPHIES: DIFFERENCES IN WORD PROCESSING SKILLS , 2014 .

[46]  L. Lavine,et al.  Differentiation of letterlike forms in prereading children. , 1977 .

[47]  D. Pelli,et al.  Feature detection and letter identification , 2006, Vision Research.

[48]  Nancy B. Carlisle,et al.  Where do we store the memory representations that guide attention? , 2013, Journal of vision.

[49]  I. J. Gelb A study of writing , 1954 .

[50]  M. Stephens EDF Statistics for Goodness of Fit and Some Comparisons , 1974 .

[51]  Ian C Simpson,et al.  A letter visual-similarity matrix for Latin-based alphabets , 2013, Behavior research methods.

[52]  David L. Share,et al.  Aksharas, alphasyllabaries, abugidas, alphabets and orthographic depth: Reflections on Rimzhim, Katz and Fowler (2014) , 2016 .

[53]  L. Katz,et al.  The reading process is different for different orthographies : the orthographic depth hypothesis , 1992 .

[54]  R. Baayen,et al.  Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items , 2008 .

[55]  Taeko N. Wydell,et al.  Cross-Cultural/Linguistic Differences in the Prevalence of Developmental Dyslexia and the Hypothesis of Granularity and Transparency , 2012 .

[56]  Adam J. Berinsky,et al.  Evaluating Online Labor Markets for Experimental Research: Amazon.com's Mechanical Turk , 2012, Political Analysis.

[57]  Charles A. Perfetti,et al.  Universal Reading Processes Are Modulated by Language and Writing System , 2013 .

[58]  Catherine McBride-Chang,et al.  Visual spatial skill: a consequence of learning to read? , 2011, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[59]  Sonali Nag,et al.  Cognitive profiles of poor readers of Kannada , 2011 .

[60]  S. Jay Samuels,et al.  Developmental changes in character-complexity and word-length effects when reading Chinese script , 2010 .

[61]  Sonali Nag,et al.  Early reading in Kannada: The pace of acquisition of orthographic knowledge and phonemic awareness , 2007 .

[62]  L. Kyriakides,et al.  The architecture, dynamics, and development of mental processing: Greek, Chinese, or Universal? , 2005 .

[63]  Charles A. Perfetti,et al.  The Universal Grammar of Reading , 2003 .

[64]  Andrew Watson,et al.  Perimetric Complexity of Binary Digital Images , 2012 .

[65]  Ying Wang,et al.  The impact of visual-spatial attention on reading and spelling in Chinese children , 2016 .

[66]  Chuanren Ke,et al.  Radical Awareness and Word Acquisition Among Nonnative Learners of Chinese , 2007 .

[67]  W. Köhler Gestalt psychology , 1967 .

[68]  Diana Masny,et al.  In V.Cook and B. Basetti (eds.), Second language writing systems. Multilingual Matters Ltd., Clevedon U.K. Voices of dissent: Different and differing views on conceptualizing writing system research. (DRAFT) , 2003 .

[69]  Travis Simcox,et al.  Collecting response times using Amazon Mechanical Turk and Adobe Flash , 2013, Behavior Research Methods.

[70]  Yuri Shelepin,et al.  Complexity of Images: Experimental and Computational Estimates Compared , 2012, Perception.

[71]  Rebecca Treiman,et al.  Learning About Writing Begins Informally , 2010 .

[72]  Jesse Chandler,et al.  Nonnaïveté among Amazon Mechanical Turk workers: Consequences and solutions for behavioral researchers , 2013, Behavior Research Methods.

[73]  Ram Frost,et al.  Towards a universal model of reading , 2012, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[74]  Heather Winskel,et al.  Spelling development in Thai children , 2010 .

[75]  P. H. Seymour,et al.  Foundation literacy acquisition in European orthographies. , 2003, British journal of psychology.

[76]  E. Gibson,et al.  Principles of Perceptual Learning and Development , 1973 .

[77]  D H HUBEL,et al.  RECEPTIVE FIELDS AND FUNCTIONAL ARCHITECTURE IN TWO NONSTRIATE VISUAL AREAS (18 AND 19) OF THE CAT. , 1965, Journal of neurophysiology.

[78]  Hua Shu,et al.  Sublexical Processing in Reading Chinese: A Development Study , 1999 .

[79]  Rebecca Treiman,et al.  Young children's knowledge about the spatial layout of writing , 2015, Writing systems research.

[80]  Gislin Dagnelie,et al.  Visual prosthetics: physiology, bioengineering, rehabilitation. , 2011 .

[81]  Sonali Nag,et al.  Beyond alphabetic processes: literacy and its acquisition in the alphasyllabic languages , 2011 .

[82]  D. Allport,et al.  What Are the Functional Orthographic Units in Chinese Word Recognition: The Stroke or the Stroke Pattern? , 1996 .

[83]  Patrick Cavanagh,et al.  What Line Drawings Reveal About the Visual Brain , 2011, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[84]  Larry Wasserman,et al.  All of Statistics: A Concise Course in Statistical Inference , 2004 .

[85]  Philip T. Quinlan,et al.  Child and Symbol Factors in Learning to Read a Visually Complex Writing System , 2014 .