Minimalism and the Syntax of Graphs

Four experiments examined Tufte's syntactic rule that graphs should have maximal data-ink ratios produced by erasing non-data-ink and redundant data-ink. In Experiment 1, the data-ink ratios of bar and line graphs affected the accuracy and response times for comparison, difference, and mean questions: the higher the data-ink ratio, the faster the response time and the greater the accuracy. Experiments 2 and 3 showed that the effects of ink in the syntactic elements of a graph depend on the location and function of the element: redundant ink in the indicators had limited effects on performance, pictorial backgrounds generally increased response time and decreased accuracy, y axis tick marks generally increased response time, and the y axis line and the x axis generally decreased response time. The effect of each graphical element was conditional on the type of graph and task and the presence of other graphical elements. The discussion focuses on psychological principles that may underlie the effects of each syntactic element.

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

[2]  I. Spence.  Visual psychophysics of simple graphical elements. , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

[4]  A. Comrey.  A proposed method for absolute ratio scaling , 1950, Psychometrika.

[5]  Edward Rolf Tufte,et al.  The visual display of quantitative information , 1985 .

[6]  M. Metfessel,et al.  A proposal for quantitative reporting of comparative judgments. , 1947, The Journal of psychology.

[7]  M A Buttigieg,et al.  Emergent Features in Visual Display Design for Two Types of Failure Detection Tasks , 1991, Human factors.

[8]  U. Neisser.  Decision-time without reaction-time: Experiments in visual scanning. , 1963 .

[9]  Stephen M. Kosslyn,et al.  Graphics and Human Information Processing: A Review of Five Books , 1985 .

[10]  Woodrow Barfield,et al.  The effects of two- or three-dimensional graphics on the problem-solving performance of experienced and novice decision makers , 1989 .

[11]  Hugh O. Whitehurst.  Screening Designs Used to Estimate the Relative Effects of Display Factors on Dial Reading , 1982 .

[12]  U. Neisser.  VISUAL SEARCH. , 1964, Scientific American.

[13]  Robert Lewis,et al.  Process and representation in graphical displays , 1990 .

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

[15]  S. Kosslyn.  Understanding charts and graphs , 1989 .

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

[17]  Mark S. Sanders,et al.  Human factors in engineering and design, 6th ed. , 1987 .

[18]  John J. Bertin,et al.  The semiology of graphics , 1983 .

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

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