Perception of means, sums, and areas
Autor: | Aire Raidvee, Mai Toom, Kristiina Averin, Jüri Allik |
---|---|
Rok vydání: | 2020 |
Předmět: |
Linguistics and Language
Disc size media_common.quotation_subject Experimental and Cognitive Psychology Measure (mathematics) 050105 experimental psychology Language and Linguistics Visual processing Judgment 03 medical and health sciences Cognition 0302 clinical medicine Data visualization Perception Statistics Humans Attention 0501 psychology and cognitive sciences Feature integration theory Size Perception media_common Mathematics business.industry 05 social sciences Radius Circumference Sensory Systems business Photic Stimulation 030217 neurology & neurosurgery |
Zdroj: | Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics. 82:865-876 |
ISSN: | 1943-393X 1943-3921 |
DOI: | 10.3758/s13414-019-01938-7 |
Popis: | In this age of data visualization, it is important to understand our perception of the symbols that are used. For example, does the perceived size of a disc correspond most closely to its area, diameter, circumference, or some other measure? When multiple items are present, this becomes a question of ensemble perception. Here, we compare observers' performance across three different tasks: judgments of (i) the mean diameter, (ii) the total diameter, or (iii) the total area of (N = 1, 2, 3, or 7) test circles compared with a single reference circle. We draw a parallel between Anne Treisman's feature integration theory and Daniel Kahneman's cognitive systems, comparing the preattentive stage to System 1, and the focused attention stage to System 2. In accordance with Kahneman's prediction, average size (diameter) of the geometric figures can be judged with considerable accuracy, but the total diameter of the same figures cannot. Like the total length, the cumulative area covered by circles was also judged considerably less accurately than the mean diameter. Differences in efficiency between these three tasks illustrate powerful constraints upon visual processing: The visual system is well adapted for the perception of the mean size while there are no analogous mechanisms for the accurate perception of the total length or cumulative area. Thus, in visualizing data, using bubble charts proportional to area may be misleading as our visual system seems better adapted to perceive disc size by the radius rather than the area. |
Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
Externí odkaz: |