Abstract
Diagrams for presenting quantitative data are an important component of print communication. Their rate of use is high and rising. This reflects in part the recent development of software tools for generating data graphics. These programs allow a wide range of choices for data visualisation — some of which may be ugly or ineffective. How has graph usage evolved during this period? A survey of graph usage in academic journals, magazines, and newspapers during the years 1985-1994 revealed several dynamic trends in the characteristics of data graphics, as well as robust differences between media. However, graph features that have been singled out by experts as poor choices, such as “3-D” rendering, do not seem to be on the rise.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Adrenaline Software, Inc. (1993). [Computer software]. Charts Pro 1.04. Québec, Canada.
Bertin, J. (1967). Sémiologie graphique: Les diagrammes, les réseaux, les cartes. Paris: La Haye Mouton.
Bertin, J. (1980). The basic test of the graph: A matrix theory of graph construction and cartography. In P.A. Kolers, M.E. Wrolstad and H. Bouma (Eds), Processing of visible language 2. New York:Plenum Press, pp. 585–604.
Bertin, J. (1983). Semiology of graphics (W.J. Berg, trans.). Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
Carswell, C.M. (1992). Choosing specifiers: An evaluation of the basic tasks model of graphical perception. Special issue: Visual displays. Human Factors 34:535–554.
Casali, J.G. and Gaylin, K.B. (1988). Selected graph design variables in four interpretation tasks: A microcomputer-based pilot study. Behaviour & Information Technology 7:31–49.
Clark, H.H. and Clark, E.V. (1977). Psychology and language: An introduction to psycholinguistics. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Cleveland, W.S. (1984). Graphs in scientific publications. American Statistician 38(4):261–269
Cleveland, W.S. (1985). The elements of graphing data. Monterey, CA: Wadsworth Advanced Books and Software.
Cleveland, W.S., Harris, C.S. and McGill, R. (1983). Experiments on quantitative judgments of graphs and maps. Bell System Technical Journal 62:16591674.
Fish, D. and McCartney, R., this volume.
Gattis, M. and Holyoak, K.J. (1996). Mapping conceptual to spatial relations in visual reasoning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 22:231–239.
Howard, I.P. (1982). Human visual orientation. New York:Wiley.
Kerpedjiev, S., this volume.
Kerpedjiev, S., Carenini, G., Green, N., Moore, J. and Roth, S. (1998, October). Saying it in graphics: From intentions to visualisations. Paper presented at the EEE symposium on information visualisation (InfoVis ’98), Research Triangle Park, NC.
Kosslyn, S. (1993). Elements of graph design. New York:Freeman.
Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Larkin, J.H. and Simon, H.A. (1987). Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words. Cognitive Science 11:65–100.
Lohse, G.L., Walker, N. and Rueler, H.H. (1994). A classification of visual representations. Communications of the ACM 37:36–49.
Macdonald-Ross, M. (1977). How numbers are shown. AV Communications Review 25:359–409.
MathSoft (1995). [Computer software]. S-Plus 3.3. Cambridge, MA.
Pinker, S. (1990). A Theory of graph comprehension. In R. Freedle (Ed.), Artificial intelligence and the future of testing. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 73–126.
Shah, P. and Carpenter, P.A. (1995). Conceptual limitations in comprehending line graphs. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 124:43–61.
Simkin, D. and Hastie, R. (1987). An information-processing analysis of graph perception. Journal of the American Statistical Association 82:454–465.
Spence, I. (1990). Visual psychophysics of simple graphical elements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 16:683–692.
Tufte, E.R. (1983). The visual display of quantitative information. Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press.
Tufte, E.R. (1990). Envisioning information. Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press.
Tukey, J.W. (1977). Exploratory data analysis. Reading, MA:Addison-Wesley.
Tversky, B. (1995). Cognitive origins of graphic conventions. In F.T. Marchese (Ed.), Understanding images. New York: Springer, pp. 29–53.
Tversky, B. and Schiano, D.J. (1989). Perceptual and conceptual factors in distortions in memory for graphs and maps. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 118:387–398.
Wainer, H. (1984). How to display data badly. American Statistician 38:137–147.
Zacks, J., Levy, E., Tversky, B. and Schiano, D.J. (1998). Reading bar graphs: Effects of extraneous depth cues and graphical context. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 4:119–138.
Zacks, J. and Tversky, B. (1999). Bars and lines: A study of graphic communication. Memory and Cognition 27(6):1073–1079.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2002 Springer-Verlag London
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Zacks, J., Levy, E., Tversky, B., Schiano, D. (2002). Graphs in Print. In: Anderson, M., Meyer, B., Olivier, P. (eds) Diagrammatic Representation and Reasoning. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-0109-3_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-0109-3_11
Publisher Name: Springer, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-85233-242-6
Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-0109-3
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive