Abstract
What is the common ground for a science of diagrams? A simple definition of which notations qualify as diagrams, if it were possible to achieve one, is likely to exclude valuable insights. As an alternative we suggest that common ground should be established on a taxonomic basis. A wide range of candidate taxonomies has already been described in several different academic fields. When taxonomies are needed, we propose that the taxonomic precedents should be treated more analytically than simply selecting the most inclusive or rigorous to be extended as necessary.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Arnheim, R. (1969). Visual thinking. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Barnard, P. and Marcel, T. (1978). Representation and understanding in the use of symbols and pictograms. In R. Easterby and H. Zwaga (Eds), Information design. Chichester: Wiley, pp. 37–75.
Barthes, R. (1965). Elements de semiologie. Translated by A. Lavers and C. Smith, Elements of semiology. New York: Hill and Wang (1975).
Bennett, K.B. and Flach, J.M. (1992). Graphical displays: Implications for divided attention, focused attention and problem solving. Human Factors 34(5):513–533.
Bertin, J. (1967). Semiologie graphique: les diagrammes, les reseaux, les cartes. The Hague/Paris: Mouton/Gauthiers-Villars.
Bertin, J. (1977). La graphique et le traitement graphique de l’information. Paris: Flammarion.
Blackwell, A.F. (1997). Diagrams about thinking about thinking about diagrams. In M. Anderson (Ed.), Reasoning with diagrammatic representations II: Papers from the AAAI 1997 fall symposium. Technical report FS-97–02. Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press, pp. 77–84.
Bowman, W.J. (1968). Graphic communication. New York: Wiley.
Bullimore, M.A., Howarth, P.A. and Fulton, E.J. (1995). Assessment of visual performance. In J.R. Wilson and E.N. Corlett (Eds), Evaluation of human work (2nd edn). London: Taylor and Francis, pp. 804–839.
Card, S., Mackinlay J., and Shneiderman, B. (1999). Readings in information visualization: Using vision to think. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann, pp. 134.
Cheng, P.C.-H. (1996). Functional roles for the cognitive analysis of diagrams in problem solving. In Proceedings of 18th annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 207–212.
Chuah, M.C., and Roth, S.F. (1996). On the semantics of interactive visualizations. In Proceedings of information visualization, IEEE, San Francisco, October 1996, pp. 29–36.
Cox, R. and Brna, P. (1995). Supporting the use of external representations in problem solving: The need for flexible learning environments. Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 6(2):239–302.
Dale, E. (1969). Audiovisual methods in teaching (3rd edn). New York, Holt, Rhinehart & Winston.
Doblin, J. (1980). A structure for nontextual communications. In P.A. Kolers, M.E. Wrolstad and H. Bouma (Eds), Processing of visible language 2. New York: Plenum Press, pp. 89–111.
Eco, U. (1985). Producing signs. In M. Blonsky (Ed.), On signs. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, pp. 176–183.
Elkins, J. (1999). The domain of images. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Engelhardt, Y. (1998). Meaningful space: How graphics use space to convey information. In Proceedings of vision plus 4, School of Design, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, pp. 108–126.
Engelhardt, Y., Bruin, J., Janssen, T. and Scha, R. (1996). The visual grammar of information graphics. In N.H. Narayanan and J. Damski (Eds), Proceedings of AID ’96 workshop on visual representation, reasoning and interaction in design, Key Centre for Design Computing, University of Sydney.
Garland, K. (1979). Some general characteristics present in diagrams denoting activity, event and relationship. Information Design Journal 1(1):15–22.
Goldsmith, E. (1984). Research into illustration: An approach and a review. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Goodman, N. (1969). Languages of art: An approach to a theory of symbols. London: Oxford University Press.
Green T.R.G. and Petre M. (1996). Usability analysis of visual programming environments: A “cognitive dimensions” approach. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing 7:131–174.
Green, T.R.G. and Blackwell, A.F. (1998). Design for usability using cognitive dimensions. Tutorial presented at BCS conference on human-computer interaction HCI’98, Sheffield, UK.
Hardin, P. (1981). Representational characteristics in diagrams of statements of relationships. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Iowa, UM 812 8401.
Harrison, R.P. (1964). Pictic analysis: Toward a vocabulary and syntax for the pictorial code; with research on facial expression. Unpublished PhD thesis, Michigan State University.
Horn, R.E. (1999). Visual language: Global communication for the 21st century. Bainbridge Island, WA: MacroVU, Inc.
Ittelson, W.H. (1996). Visual perception of markings. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 3:171–187.
Kandinsky, W. (1921). Fundamental elements of painting [in Russian]. In a report to the People’s Commissariat for Public Education, Moscow. English translation published in Languages in Design 1(3, 1993):267–271.
Karsten, K.G. (1923). Charts and graphs. New York: Prentice-Hall.
Knowlton, J.Q. (1966). On the definition of “picture”. AV Communication Review 14:157–183.
Krampen, M. (1965). Signs and symbols in graphic communication. Design Quarterly 62:1–31.
Kress, G. and van Leeuwen, T. (1996). Reading images: The grammar of visual design. London: Routledge.
Larkin, J.H. and Simon, H.A. (1987). Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words. Cognitive Science 11:65–99.
Lohse, G.L., Biolisi, K., Walker, N. and Rueter, H.H. (1994). A classification of visual representations. Communications of the ACM 37(12):36–49.
MacEachren, A.M. (1995). How maps work: Representation, visualization, and design. New York: Guilford Press.
Macdonald-Ross, M. (1977). Graphics in texts. In L.S. Shulman (Ed.), Review of research in education, Vol. 5. Itasca, IL: Peacock.
Mackinlay, J. (1986). Automating the design of graphical presentations of relational information. ACM Transactions on Graphics 5(2):110–141.
Marriott, K. and Meyer, B. (1998). The CCMG visual language hierarchy. In K. Marriott and B. Meyer (Eds), Visual language theory. Berlin: Springer, pp. 129–170.
Martin, J. and McClure, C. (1985). Diagramming techniques for analysts and programmers. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Narayanan, N.H. (1997). Diagrammatic communication: A taxonomic overview. In N. Kokinov (Ed.), Perspectives on cognitive science, Vol. 3. Sofia: New Bulgarian University Press.
Netz, R. (1999). The shaping of deduction in Greek mathematics: A study in cognitive history. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Newsham, R. (1995). Symbolic representation in object-oriented methodologies: Modeling the essence of the computer system. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Department of Computer Science, Nottingham Trent University.
Nyerges, T.L. (1991a). Geographic information abstractions: Conceptual clarity for geographic modeling. Environment and Planning A 23:1483–1499.
Nyerges, T.L. (1991b). Representing geographical meaning. In B.P. Buttenfield and R.B. McMaster (Eds), Map generalization: Making rules for knowledge representation. Essex, UK: Longman, pp. 59–85.
Owen, C.L. (1986). Technology, literacy, and graphic systems. In M.E. Wrolstad and D.F. Fisher (Eds), Towards a new understanding of literacy. In Proceedingsof the third conference on processing of visual language, 31 May-3 June 1982, Airlie House, Airlie, VA.
Peirce, C.S. (written around 1897, republished in 1932). Elements of logic. In C. Hartshorne and P. Weiss (Eds), The collected papers of C.S. Peirce. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Price, B.A., Baecker, R.M. and Small, I.S. (1993). A principled taxonomy of software visualization. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing 4(3):211–266.
Rankin, R. (1990). A taxonomy of graph types. Information Design Journal 6(2):147–159.
Richards, C.J. (1984). Diagrammatics. PhD thesis, Royal College of Art, London.
Roth, S.F. and Mattis, J. (1990). Data characterization for intelligent graphics presentation. In Proceedings of the conference on human factors in computing systems (SIGCHI ’90), Seattle, WA, April 1990, pp. 193–200.
Roth, S.F., Kolojejchick, J., Mattis, J. and Goldstein, J. (1994). Interactive graphic design using automatic presentation knowledge. In Proceedings of the CHI’94 conference on human factors in computing systems. New York: ACM Press, pp. 112–117.
Saint-Martin, F. (1987). Semiotics of visual language. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Sampson, G. (1985). Writing systems: A linguistic introduction. London: Hutchinson.
Scaife, M. and Rogers, Y. (1996). External cognition: How do graphical representations work? International Journal of Human Computer Studies 45:185–214.
Shimojima, A. (1999). The graphic-linguistic distinction - exploring alternatives. Artificial Intelligence Review 13:313–335.
Stewart, A.H. (1976). Graphic representation of models in linguistic theory. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Strothotte, C. and Strothotte, T. (1997). Seeing between the pixels. Berlin: Springer Verlag.
Tversky, B. (1997). Cognitive principles of graphic displays. In M. Anderson (Ed.), Reasoning with diagrammatic representations II: Papers from the AAAI 1997 fall symposium. Technical report FS-97–02. Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press, pp. 97–02.
Tweedie, L. (1997). Characterizing interactive externalizations. In Proceedings of the CHI’97 conference on human factors in computing systems. New York: ACM Press, pp. 375–382.
Twyman, M. (1979). A schema for the study of graphic language. In P.A. Kolers, M.E. Wrolstad and H. Bouma (Eds), Processing of visible language, Vol. 1. New York: Plenum Press, pp. 117–150.
van der Waarde, K. (1993). An investigation into the suitability of the graphic presentation of patient package inserts. Unpublished PhD thesis, Department of Typography and Graphic Communication, University of Reading, UK.
Wehrend, R. and Lewis, C. (1990). A problem-oriented classification of visualization techniques. In Proceedings of the first IEEE conference on visualization: Visualization 90, October 1990. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE, pp. 139–143.
Werner, H. and Kaplan, B. (1963). Symbol formation: An organismic-developmental approach to language and the expression of thought. New York: Wiley.
Winn, W. (1989). The design and use of instructional graphics. In H. Mandl and J.R. Levin (Eds), Knowledge acquisition from text and pictures. North-Holland: Elsevier.
Wexelblat, A. (1991). Giving meaning to place: semantic spaces. In M. Benedikt (Ed.), Cyberspace: First steps. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 255–271.
Wood, D. and Fels, J. (1986). Designs on signs: Myth and meaning in maps. Cartographica 23:54–103.
Wurman, R.S. (1991). Information anxiety. New York: Doubleday.
Zhang, J. (1997). The nature of external representations in problem solving. Cognitive Science 21:179–217.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2002 Springer-Verlag London
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Blackwell, A., Engelhardt, Y. (2002). A Meta-Taxonomy for Diagram Research. In: Anderson, M., Meyer, B., Olivier, P. (eds) Diagrammatic Representation and Reasoning. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-0109-3_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-0109-3_3
Publisher Name: Springer, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-85233-242-6
Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-0109-3
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive