The Apparent and Effective Dimensionality of Representations of Objects

Abstract

Information displays commonly use 2-D and 3-D objects even though the numbers represented are 1-D. This practice may be problematic because the psychophysical relation between perceived and physical magnitudes is generally nonlinear for areas and volumes. Nonetheless, this research shows that apparent 2-D and 3-D objects can produce linear psychophysical functions if only one dimension shows variation. Processing time increases with the number of dimensions in the objects that show variation, not with the apparent dimensionality. Indeed, when only one dimension showed variation, apparent 3-D objects were judged more quickly than were apparent 2-D or 1-D objects. These results present a challenge for computational models of size perception and have implications for the design of information displays. Actual or potential applications of this research include the design and use of statistical graphs and information displays; objects that display variation in more than one dimension should not be used to represent single (1-D) numerical variables if they are to be judged accurately and rapidly.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abbott, E. A. (1884). Flatland: A romance of many dimensions. London: Seeley.

Baird, J. C. (1970). Psychophysical analysis of visual space. New York: Pergamon.

Barfield, W. , & Robless, R. (1989). The effects of two- and three-dimensional graphics on the problem-solving performance of experienced and novice decision-makers. Behavior and Information Technology, 8 369–385.

Brannon, E. M. , & Terrace, H. S. (1998). Ordering of the numerosities 1 to 9 by monkeys. Science, 282 746–749.

Butler, D. L. , & Overshiner, C. (1983). Mental multiplications: Implications for area and volume judgments. Perception and Psychophysics, 34 593–598.

Carswell, C. M Frankenberger, S. & Bernhard, D. (1991). Graphing in depth: Perspectives on the use of three-dimensional graphs to represent lower-dimensional data. Behavior and Information Technology, 10 459–474.

Chittaro, L. Combi, C. Trapasso, G. (2003). Data mining on temporal data: A visual approach and its clinical application to hemodialysis. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing, 14 591–620.

Comrey, A. L. (1950). A proposed method for absolute ratio scaling. Psychometrika, 15 317–327.

Croxton, F. E. , & Stein, H. (1932). Graphic comparisons by bars, squares, circles, and cubes. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 27 54–60.

10.

Dehaene, S. Dehaene-Lambertz, G. , & Cohen, L. (1998). Abstract representations of numbers in the animal and human brain. Trends in Neurosciences, 21 355–361.

11.

Fetterman, J. G. (1993). Numerosity discrimination: Both time and number matter. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 19 149–164.

12.

Gabbiani, F. Krapp, H. G. Laurent, G. (1999). Computation of object approach by a wide-field, motion-sensitive neuron. Journal of Neuroscience, 19 1122–1141.

13.

Hatsopoulos, N. Gabbiani, F. Laurent, G. (1995). Elementary computation of object approach by a wide-field visual neuron. Science, 270 1000–1003.

14.

Keim, D. A. (2002). Information visualization and visual data mining. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 7 100–107.

15.

Koch, C. , & Poggio, T. (1992). Multiplying with synapses and neurons. In T. McKenna , J. Davis , & S. Zornetzer (Eds.), Single neuron computation (pp. 315–345). San Diego: Academic.

16.

Kosslyn, S. M. (1989). Understanding charts and graphs. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 3 185–225.

17.

Kosslyn, S. M Flynn, R. A Amsterdam, J. B & Wang, G. (1990). Components of high-level vision: A cognitive neuroscience analysis and accounts of neurological syndromes. Cognition, 34 203–277.

18.

Marr, D. (1982). Vision. New York: Freeman.

19.

Metfessel, M. (1947). A proposal for quantitative reporting of comparative judgments. Journal of Psychology, 24 229–235.

20.

Rogers, B. , & Graham, M. (1979). Motion parallax as an independent cue for depth perception. Perception, 8 125–134.

21.

Siegrist, M. (1996). The use and misuse of three-dimensional graphs to represent lower-dimensional data. Behaviour and Information Technology, 15 96–100.

22.

Spence, I. (1990). Visual psychophysics of simple graphical elements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 16 683–692.

23.

Spence, I. , & Krizel, P. (1994). Children's perception of proportion in graphs. Child Development, 65 1193–1213.

24.

Spence, I. , & Lewandowsky, S. (1990). Graphical perception. In J. Fox & S. Long (Eds.), Modern methods of data analysis (pp. 13–57). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

25.

Stevens, S. S. , & Galanter, E. (1957). Ratio scales and category scales for a dozen perceptual continua. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54 377–411.

26.

Stuart, G. W Bossomaier, T. R. J. , & Johnson, S. (1993). Preattentive processing of object size - Implications for theories of size perception. Perception, 22 1175–1193.

27.

Teghtsoonian, M. (1965). The judgment of size. American Journal of Psychology, 78 392–402.

28.

Tufte, E. R. (1983). The visual display of quantitative information. Cheshire, CT: Graphics.

29.

Whalen, J. Gallistel, C. R. Gelman, R. (1999). Non-verbal counting in humans: The psychophysics of number representation. Psychological Science, 10 130–137.

30.

Wickens, C. D. , & Hollands, J. G. (2000). Engineering psychology and human performance (3rd ed.) Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

31.

Zacks, J. Levy, E. Tversky, B. Schiano, D. J. (1998). Reading bar graphs: Effects of extraneous depth cues and graphical context. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 4 119–138.