The discrimination of graphical elements

A model is proposed to account for how people discriminate quantities shown in pie charts and divided bar graphs (i.e. which proportion is larger, A or B?). The incremental estimation model assumes that an observer sequentially samples from the available perceptual features in a graph. The relative effectiveness of sampled perceptual features is represented by the spread of probability distributions, in the manner of signal detection theory. The model's predictions were tested in two experiments. Participants took longer with pies than divided bars and longer with non-aligned than aligned proportions in Experiment 1. In Experiment 2, participants took longer with divided bars than pies when graphs were of unequal size. Generally, graphical formats producing longer response times incurred a greater time penalty when the difference between proportions was reduced. These results were in accordance with the model's predictions. Implications for graphical display design are discussed. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Language: en

[1]  D. Regan,et al.  Evidence for a neural mechanism that encodes angles , 1996, Vision Research.

[2]  C M Carswell,et al.  Choosing Specifiers: An Evaluation of the Basic Tasks Model of Graphical Perception , 1992, Human factors.

[3]  J J Koenderink,et al.  Discrimination of geometric angle in the fronto-parallel plane. , 1994, Spatial vision.

[4]  Philip L. Smith,et al.  The accumulator model of two-choice discrimination , 1988 .

[5]  D J Gillan,et al.  A Componential Model of Human Interaction with Graphs: 1. Linear Regression Modeling , 1994, Human factors.

[6]  J G Hollands,et al.  Judgments of Change and Proportion in Graphical Perception , 1992, Human factors.

[7]  M. Treisman,et al.  Relation between signal detectability theory and the traditional procedures for measuring sensory thresholds: Estimating d' from results given by the method of constant simuli. , 1966 .

[8]  S. Link,et al.  A sequential theory of psychological discrimination , 1975 .

[9]  W. Petrusic,et al.  Semantic congruity effects and theories of the comparison process. , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[10]  F. Ashby.  A biased random walk model for two choice reaction times , 1983 .

[11]  Stephen M. Kosslyn,et al.  Elements of graph design , 1993 .

[12]  R. Pike.  Response latency models for signal detection. , 1973, Psychological review.

[13]  S. Lewandowsky,et al.  Displaying proportions and percentages , 1991 .

[14]  David K. Simkin,et al.  An Information-Processing Analysis of Graph Perception , 1987 .

[15]  W. Cleveland.  The elements of graphing data , 1986 .

[16]  G E Legge,et al.  Efficiency of graphical perception , 1991, Perception & psychophysics.

[17]  D. M. Green,et al.  Signal detection theory and psychophysics , 1966 .

[18]  Neil A. Macmillan,et al.  Detection Theory: A User's Guide , 1991 .

[19]  Ian Spence,et al.  Judging Proportion with Graphs: The Summation Model , 1998 .