Graphs in Print



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.


Data Element Line Graph Colour Graph Academic Journal Print Medium 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Adrenaline Software, Inc. (1993). [Computer software]. Charts Pro 1.04. Québec, Canada.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bertin, J. (1967). Sémiologie graphique: Les diagrammes, les réseaux, les cartes. Paris: La Haye Mouton.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    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.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bertin, J. (1983). Semiology of graphics (W.J. Berg, trans.). Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    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.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Clark, H.H. and Clark, E.V. (1977). Psychology and language: An introduction to psycholinguistics. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cleveland, W.S. (1984). Graphs in scientific publications. American Statistician 38(4):261–269Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cleveland, W.S. (1985). The elements of graphing data. Monterey, CA: Wadsworth Advanced Books and Software.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cleveland, W.S., Harris, C.S. and McGill, R. (1983). Experiments on quantitative judgments of graphs and maps. Bell System Technical Journal 62:16591674.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fish, D. and McCartney, R., this volume.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Howard, I.P. (1982). Human visual orientation. New York:Wiley.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kerpedjiev, S., this volume.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    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.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kosslyn, S. (1993). Elements of graph design. New York:Freeman.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Larkin, J.H. and Simon, H.A. (1987). Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words. Cognitive Science 11:65–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lohse, G.L., Walker, N. and Rueler, H.H. (1994). A classification of visual representations. Communications of the ACM 37:36–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Macdonald-Ross, M. (1977). How numbers are shown. AV Communications Review 25:359–409.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    MathSoft (1995). [Computer software]. S-Plus 3.3. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    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.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Shah, P. and Carpenter, P.A. (1995). Conceptual limitations in comprehending line graphs. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 124:43–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Simkin, D. and Hastie, R. (1987). An information-processing analysis of graph perception. Journal of the American Statistical Association 82:454–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Spence, I. (1990). Visual psychophysics of simple graphical elements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 16:683–692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Tufte, E.R. (1983). The visual display of quantitative information. Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Tufte, E.R. (1990). Envisioning information. Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Tukey, J.W. (1977). Exploratory data analysis. Reading, MA:Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Tversky, B. (1995). Cognitive origins of graphic conventions. In F.T. Marchese (Ed.), Understanding images. New York: Springer, pp. 29–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Wainer, H. (1984). How to display data badly. American Statistician 38:137–147.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Zacks, J. and Tversky, B. (1999). Bars and lines: A study of graphic communication. Memory and Cognition 27(6):1073–1079.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2002

Authors and Affiliations

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations