Advertisement

Pictorial and Verbal Tools for Conveying Routes

  • Barbara Tversky
  • Paul U. Lee
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1661)

Abstract

Traditionally, depictions and descriptions have been seen as complementary; depictions have been preferred to convey iconic or metaphorically iconic information whereas descriptions have been preferred for abstract information. Both are external representations designed to complement human memory and information processing. We have found the same underlying structure and semantics for route maps and route directions. Here we find that limited schematic map and direction toolkits are sufficient for constructing directions, supporting the possibility of automatic translation between them.

Keywords

diagrams directions external representation map route 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Clark, H. H. (1992), Arenas of language use. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Denis, M. (1997), The description of routes: A cognitive approach to the production of spatial discourse. Cahiers de Psychologie Cognitive, 16, 409–458.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Denis, M. and Briffault, X. (1997), Les aides verbales a l’orientation spatiale. In M. Denis (Editor), Langue et Cognition Spatiale.Paris: Masson.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Denis, M. Pazzaglia, F., Cornoldi, C., & Bertolo, L. (1998), Spatial discourse and navigation: An analysis of route directions in the city of Venice. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 12.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Donald, M. (1991), Origins of the modern mind. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dwyer, F. M. (1978), Strategies for improving visual learning. State College, PA: Learning Services.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gleitman, L (1999), Personal communication.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Goodman, Nelson, Languages of Art: An Approach to a Theory of Symbols. The Bobbs-Merrill Company, Inc. 1968, 127–173.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kieras, D (1992), Diagrammatic display for engineered systems: effects on human performance in interacting with malfunctioning systems.International Journal on Man-Machine Studies, 36, 861–895.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kirsh, D. (1995), The intelligent use of space. Artificial Intelligence, 73, 31–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Larkin, J. H. and Simon, H. A. (1987), Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words. Cognitive Science, 11, 65–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Levie, W. H. and Lentz, R. (1982), Effects of text illustrations: A review of research. Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 30, 195–232.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Levin, J. R., Anglin, G. J. & Carney, R. N. (1987), On empirically validating functions of pictures in prose. In D. M. Willows and H. A. Houghton (editors). The psychology of illustration. NY: Pp. 51–85.. Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mayer, R. E. & Gallini, J. K. (1990), When is an illustration worth ten thousand words? Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 715–726.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Norman, D. A. (1993), Things that make us smart. NY: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Scaife, M. and Rogers, Y. (1996), External cognition: How do graphical representations work? International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 45, 185–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Stenning, K. and Oberlander, J. (1995), A cognitive theory of graphical and linguistic reasoning: Logic and implementation. Cognitive Science, 19, 97–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Suwa, M. and Tversky, B. (1997), What architects and students perceive in their sketches: A protocol analysis. Design Studies, 18, 385–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tappe, H. & Habel, C. (1998), Verbalization of dynamic sketch maps: Layers of representation and their interaction. Manuscript.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tversky, B. (1995), Cognitive origins of graphic conventions. In F. T. Marchese (Editor). Understanding images. Pp. 29–53. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tversky, B. (In press). Spatial schemas in depictions. In M. Gattis (Editors), Spatial schemas and abstract thought. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Tversky, B. and Lee, P. U. (1998), How space structures language. In C. Freksa, C. Habel, and K. F. Wender (Editors), Spatial Cognition: An interdisciplinary approach to representation and processing of spatial knowledge. Pp. 157–175. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Winn, W. (1989), The design and use of instructional graphics. In H. Mandl and J. R. Levin (Editors). Knowledge acquisition from text and pictures. Pp. 125–143. North Holland: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Zacks, J. and Tversky, B. (In press). Bars and lines: A study of graphic communication. Memory and Cognition.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Barbara Tversky
    • 1
  • Paul U. Lee
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyStanford UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations