Abstract
The development of diagrammatic logics is strongly motivated by the desire to make formal reasoning accessible to broad audiences. One major research problem, for which surprisingly little progress has been made, is to understand how to choose between semantically equivalent diagrams from the perspective of human cognition. The particular focus of this paper is on choosing between diagrams that represent either the presence or absence of individuals. To understand how to best make this choice, we conducted an empirical study. We found that representing the presence of individuals supported task performance either significantly better than, or no worse than, representing the absence of individuals. The particularly striking feature of our results was that representing the absence of individuals in a way that makes the diagram highly cluttered is detrimental to human cognition. As a result, diagrams with this feature should be avoided, but diagrams using presence (irrespective of diagram clutter) or low-cluttered absence can be used to support cognition in the context of the tasks performed in our study.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alper, B., N. Henry Riche, G. Ramos, and M. Czerwinski, Design study of LineSets, a novel set visualization technique, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 17(12):2259–2267, 2011.
Alqadah, M., G. Stapleton, J. Howse, and P. Chapman, Evaluating the impact of clutter in Euler diagrams, in 8th International Conference on the Theory and Application of Diagrams, Springer, 2014, pp. 109–123.
Blake, A., G. Stapleton, J. Howse, and P. Rodgers, The impact of topological and graphical properties on the perception of Euler diagrams, Information Sciences 330:455–482, 2015.
Burton, J., M.K. Chakraborty, L. Chouduhry, and G. Stapleton, Minimizing clutter using absence in Venn-ie, in 9th International Conference on the Theory and Application of Diagrams, Springer, 2016, pp. 107–122.
Chapman, P., G. Stapleton, P. Rodgers, L. Micallef, and A. Blake, Visualizing sets: An empirical comparison of diagram types, in 8th International Conference on the Theory and Application of Diagrams, Springer, 2014, pp. 146–160.
Choudhury, L., and M.K. Chakraborty, On extending Venn diagrams by augmenting names of individuals, in 3rd International Conference on the Theory and Application of Diagrams, Springer, 2004, pp. 142–146.
Chourdhury, L., and M.K. Chakraborty, On representing open universe, Studies in Logic 5(11):96–112, 2012.
Chourdhury, L., and M.K. Chakraborty, Singular propositions, negation and the square of opposition, Logica Universalis 10(2):215–231, 2016.
Dau, F., Constants and functions in Peirce’s existential graphs, in Conceptual Structures, Springer, 2007, pp. 429–442.
Eckstein, P.M., Visual search: A retrospective, Journal of Vision 11(5):14, 2011.
Fish, A., and J. Masthoff, An experimental study into the default reading of constraint diagrams, in IEEE Symposium Visual Languages and Human Centric Computing, IEEE, 2005, pp. 287–289.
Gil, J., J. Howse, and S., KENT Formalising spider diagrams, in IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages, IEEE, 1999, pp. 130–137.
Gurr, C., Effective diagrammatic communication: Syntactic, semantic and pragmatic issues, Journal of Visual Languages and Computing 10(4):317–342, 1999.
Hammer, E., Logic and visual information, CSLI Publications, 1995.
Healey, G.C., and J.T. Enns, Attention and visual memory in visualization and computer graphics, IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics, 18(7):1170–1188, 2012.
Hou, T., P. Chapman, and A. Blake, Antipattern comprehension: An empirical evaluation, in 9th International Conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems, IOS Press, 2016, pp. 211–224.
Howse, J., G. Stapleton, and J. Taylor, Spider diagrams, LMS Journal of Computation and Mathematics 8:145–194, 2005.
Howse, J., G. Stapleton, K. Taylor, and P. Chapman, Visualizing ontologies: A case study, in 10th International Semantic Web Conference, Springer, 2011, pp. 257–272.
Huang, L., and H. Pashler, A Boolean map theory of visual attention, Psychological review 114(3):599–631, 2007.
John, C., A. Fish, J. Howse, and J. Taylor, Exploring the notion of clutter in Euler diagrams, in 4th International Conference on the Theory and Application of Diagrams, Springer, 2006, pp. 267–282.
Kent, S., Constraint diagrams: Visualizing invariants in object oriented models, in Proceedings of OOPSLA97, ACM Press, 1997, pp. 327–341.
Khemlani, S., I. Orenes, and P. Johnson-Laird, The negations of conjunctions, conditionals, and disjunctions, Acta Psychologica 151:1–7, 2014.
Liang, K.Y., and S.L. Zeger, Longitudinal data analysis using generalized linear models, Biometrika 73:13–22, 1986.
Meulemans, W., N. Henry Riche, B. Speckmann, B. Alper, and T. Dwyer, Kelpfusion: A hybrid set visualization technique, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 19(11):1846–1858, 2013.
Mineshima, K., M. Okada, and R. Takemura, A diagrammatic inference system with Euler circles, Journal of Logic, Language and Information 21(3):365–391, 2012.
Moktefi, A., Is Euler’s circle a symbol or an icon?, Sign Systems Studies 43(4):597–615, 2015.
Purchase, H.C., Experimental Human Computer Interaction: A practical guide with visual examples, Cambridge University Press, 2012.
Riche, N., and T. Dwyer, Untangling Euler diagrams, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 16(6):1090–1099, 2010.
Rodgers, P., L. Zhang, and H. Purchase, Wellformedness properties in Euler diagrams: Which should be used?, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 18(7):1089–1100, 2012.
Rosenholtz, R., Y. Li, and L. Nakano, Measuring visual clutter, Journal of Vision 7(2):17, 2007.
Sato, Y., S. Masuda, Y. Someya, T. Tsujii, and S. Watanabe, An fMRI analysis of the efficacy of Euler diagrams in logical reasoning, in IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing, 2015, 2015, pp. 143–151.
Sato, Y., and M. Mineshima, How diagrams can support syllogistic reasoning: An experimental study, Journal of Logic, Language and Information 24(4):409–455, 2015.
Shin, S.-J., The logical status of diagrams, Cambridge University Press, 1994.
Shin, S.-J., The iconic logic of Peirce’s graphs, Bradford Book, 2002.
Stapleton, G., A. Blake, J. Burton, and A. Touloumis, Supplementary material, http://readableproofs.org/absence-study-2016. Accessed September 2016.
Stapleton, G., J. Howse, S. Thompson, J. Taylor, and P. Chapman, On the completeness of spider diagrams augmented with constants, in S.-J. Shin, and A. Moktefi, (eds.), Visual Reasoning with Diagrams, Birkhauser, 2013, pp. 107–122.
Stapleton, G., J. Taylor, J. Howse, and S. Thompson, The expressiveness of spider diagrams augmented with constants, Journal of Visual Languages and Computing 20:30–49, 2009.
Swoboda, N., Implementing Euler/Venn reasoning systems, in M. Anderson, B. Meyer, and P. Olivier, (eds.), Diagrammatic representation and reasoning, Springer-Verlag, 2001, pp. 371–386.
Swoboda, N., and G. Allwein, Using DAG transformations to verify Euler/Venn homogeneous and Euler/Venn FOL heterogeneous rules of inference, Journal on Software and System Modeling 3(2):136–149, 2004.
Szymanik, J., and R. Verbrugge, Logic and cognition: Special issue of best papers of the ESSLLI 2012 workshop, Journal of Logic, Language and Information 22:357–362, 2013.
Takemura, R., Counter-example construction with Euler diagrams, Studia Logica 103:669–696, 2015.
Wolfe, J.M., Guided Search 2.0 A revised model of visual search, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 1(2):202–238, 1994.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
About this article
Cite this article
Stapleton, G., Blake, A., Burton, J. et al. Presence and Absence of Individuals in Diagrammatic Logics: An Empirical Comparison. Stud Logica 105, 787–815 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11225-017-9711-6
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11225-017-9711-6