Naïve Realism: Folk fallacies in the design and use of visual displays

Topics in Cognitive Science

Volumn 3, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 579-608

  Smallman, Harvey S ^a   Cook, Maia B ^a  

^a Pacific Science and Engineering Group Inc   (United States)

Author keywords

Folk fallacies; Intuition; Metacognition; Realism; Spatial fidelity; Visual displays; Visual perception

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AUDIOVISUAL AID; COMPUTER INTERFACE; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTUITION; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PHOTOSTIMULATION; REACTION TIME; STANDARDS; VISION; YOUNG ADULT;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AUDIOVISUAL AIDS; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTUITION; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PHOTIC STIMULATION; REACTION TIME; USER-COMPUTER INTERFACE; VISUAL PERCEPTION; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 79960251144     PISSN: 17568757     EISSN: 17568765     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1756-8765.2010.01114.x     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Andre, A. D., & Wickens, C. D. (1995). When users want what's NOT best for them. Ergonomics in Design, 3, 10-14.
2. Bennett, K. B., Nagy, A. L., & Flach, J. M. (1997). Visual displays. In G. Salvendy (Ed.), Handbook of human factors and ergonomics (2nd ed.) (pp. 659-696). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
3. Berlyne, D. E. (1970). Novelty, complexity and hedonic value. Perception & Psychophysics, 8, 279-286.
4. Bertin, J. (1983) Semiology of graphics: Diagrams, networks, maps (translated by W. J. Berg). Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
5. Bowman, D. A., Kruijff, E., LaViola, J. J. Jr, & Poupyrev, I. (2005). 3D user interfaces: Theory and practice. Boston, Addison-Wesley.
6. Carroll, J. M., & Rosson, M. B. (1987). Paradox of the active user. In J. M. Carroll (Ed.), Interfacing thought: Cognitive aspects of human-computer interaction (pp. 80-111). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
7. Carter, W. E., Shrestha, R. L., & Slatton, K. C. (2007). Geodetic laser scanning. Physics Today, 60, 41-47.
8. Cavanagh, P. (2005). The artist as neuroscientist. Nature, 434, 301-307.
9. Cruz, I. F. (1996). Tailorable information visualization. ACM Computing Survey, 28 (4es), December 1996.
10. Cutting, J. E., & Vishton, P. M. (1995). Perceiving layout and knowing distances: The integration, relative potency, and contextual use of different information about depth. In W. Epstein & S. Rogers (Eds.), Handbook of perception and cognition, Vol. 5 (pp. 69-117). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
11. Daukantas, P. (2009). Photorealistic rendering: Making the virtual into reality. Optics & Photonics News, 20, 34-39.
12. Dennehy, M. T., Nesbitt, D. W., & Sumey, R. A. (1994). Real-time three-dimensional graphics display for antiair warfare command and control. Johns Hopkins APL Technical Digest, 15, 110-119.
13. Eley, M. G. (1991). Selective encoding in the interpretation of topographic maps. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 5, 403-422.
14. Ferwerda, J. A. (2003). Three varieties of realism in computer graphics. In B. E. Rogowitz & T. N. Pappas (Eds.), Proceedings SPIE human vision and electronic imaging VIII, Vol. 5007 (pp. 290-297). Santa Clara, CA: SPIE press.
15. Frisby, J. P. (1980). Seeing. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
16. Glenberg, A. M., & Epstein, W. (1985). Calibration of comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 11, 702-718.
17. Hegarty, M., & Kozhevnikov, M. (1999). Types of visual-spatial representations and mathematical problem solving. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 684-689.
18. Hegarty, M., Smallman, H. S., Stull, A. T., & Canham, M. (2009). Naïve cartography: How intuitions about display configuration can hurt performance. Cartographica, 44, 171-186.
19. Hegarty, M., & Waller, D. (2005). Individual differences in spatial abilities. In P. Shah & A. Miyake (Eds.), Handbook of visuospatial thinking (pp. 121-169). New York: Cambridge University Press.
20. Imhof, E. (1982). Cartographic relief presentation. Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter.
21. Jacobsen, T., & Höfel, L. (2002). Aesthetic judgments of novel graphic patterns: Analysis of individual judgments. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 95, 755-766.
22. Jenks, G. F., & Brown, D. A. (1966). Three dimensional map construction. Science, 154, 857-864.
23. Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). Effects of feedback intervention on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 254-284.
24. Kyllonen, P. C., Lohman, D. F., & Snow, R. E. (1984). Effects of aptitudes, strategy training, and task facets on spatial task performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 130-145.
25. Loomis, J. M. (1992). Distal attribution and presence. Presence, 1, 113-119.
26. Loomis, J. M., & Knapp, J. M. (2003). Visual perception of egocentric distance in real and virtual environments. In L. J. Hettinger & M. W. Hass (Eds.), Virtual and adaptive environments (pp. 21-46). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
27. Lowe, R. K. (1994). Selectivity in diagrams: Reading between the lines. Education Psychology, 14, 467-491.
28. MacEachren, A. M. (1995). How maps works: Representation, visualization, and design. London: Guilford Press.
29. MacLeod, D. I. A., & Willen, J. D. (1995). Is there a visual space? In R. D. Luce, M. D. D'Zmura, D. D. Hoffman, G. J. Iverson, & A. K. Romney (Eds.), Geometric representations of perceptual phenomena: Papers in honor of Tarow Indow on his 70th (pp. 47-60). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
30. Maki, R. H., Foley, J. M., Kaher, W. K., Thompson, R. C., & Willert, M. G. (1990). Increased processing enhances calibration of comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 609-616.
31. McKee, S. P., Levi, D. M., & Bowne, S. F. (1990). The imprecision of stereopsis. Vision Research, 30, 1763-1779.
32. McLeary, G. F., Jenks, G. F., & Ellis, S. R. (1991). Cartography and map displays. In S. R. Ellis, M. Kaiser, & A. J. Grunwald (Eds.), Pictorial communication in virtual and real environments (pp. 76-96). London: Taylor & Francis.
33. Milgram, P., & Kishono, F. (1994). A taxonomy of mixed reality virtual displays. IECE Transactions on Information Systems, E77-D(12), 1321-1329.
34. Neth, H., Sims, C., & Gray, W. (2006). Melioration dominates maximization: Stable suboptimal performance despite global feedback. In R. Sun & N. Miyake (Eds.), Proceedings of the 28th annual meeting of the cognitive science society (pp. 627-632). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
35. Pick, H. L., Heinrichs, M. R., Montello, D. R., Smith, K., Sullivan, C. N., & Thompson, W. B. (1995). Topographic map reading. In P. A. Hancock, J. M. Flach, J. Caird, & K. J. Vicente (Eds.), Local applications of the ecological approach to human-machine systems, Vol. 2 (pp. 255-284). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
36. Pylyshyn, Z. W. (2003). Seeing and visualizing: It's not what you think. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press Bradford Books.
37. Sanders, M. S., & McCormick, E. J. (1993). Human factors in engineering and design (7th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.
38. Scholl, M. J., & Egeth, H. E. (1982). Cognitive correlates of map reading ability. Intelligence, 6, 215-230.
39. Sedgwick, H. A. (1986). Space perception. In K. R. Boff, L. Kaufman, & J. P. Thomas (Eds.), Handbook of Perception and human performance, Vol. 1 (pp. 2101-2157). New York: Wiley.
40. diSessa, A. A. (2004). Metarepresentation: Native competence and targets for instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 22, 293-331.
41. Simons, D. J., & Rensink, R. A. (2005). Change blindness: Past, present and future. Trends in Cognitive Science, 9, 16-20.
42. Smallman, H. S., & Hegarty, M. (2007). Expertise, spatial ability and intuition in the use of complex visual displays. In Proceedings of the 51st annual meeting of the human factors and ergonomics society (pp. 2000-2004). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
43. Smallman, H. S., & St. John, M. (2005). Naïve Realism: Misplaced faith in the utility of realistic displays. Ergonomics in Design, 13, 6-13.
44. Smallman, H. S., St. John, M., & Cowen, M. B. (2002). Use and misuse of linear perspective in the perceptual reconstruction of 3-D perspective view displays. In Proceedings of the 46th annual meeting of the human factors and ergonomics society (pp. 1560-1564). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
45. Smallman, H. S., St. John, M., Oonk, H. M., & Cowen, M. B. (2000). When beauty is only skin deep: 3-D realistic icons are harder to identify than conventional 2-D military symbols. In Proceedings of the 44th annual meeting of the human factors and ergonomics society (pp. 480-483). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
46. Smallman, H. S., St. John, M., Oonk, H. M., & Cowen, M. B. (2001). 'SYMBICONS': A hybrid symbology that combines the best elements of SYMBols and ICONS. In Proceedings of the 45th annual meeting of the human factors and ergonomics society (pp. 110-114). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
47. St. John, M., Cowen, M. B., Smallman, H. S., & Oonk, H. M. (2001). The use of 2D and 3D displays for shape understanding vs. relative position tasks. Human Factors, 43, 79-98.
48. Steiner, B. A., & Dotson, D. A. (1990). The use of 3-D stereo display of tactical information. In Proceedings of the 34th annual meeting of the human factors society (pp. 36-40). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
49. Sutherland, I. F. (1965). The ultimate display. In Proceedings of the international federation of information processing (IFIP) congress (pp. 506-508). New York: IFIP.
50. Tractinsky, N., Katz, A. S., & Ikar, D. (2000). What is beautiful is usable. Interacting with Computers, 13, 127-145.
51. Tufte, E. R. (1983). The visual display of quantitative information. Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press.
52. Tversky, B., Morrison, J. B., & Betrancourt, M. (2002). Animation: Can it facilitate? International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 57, 247-262.
53. Vandenberg, S. G., & Kuse, A. R. (1978). Mental rotations, a group test of three-dimensional spatial visualization. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 47, 599-604.
54. Varakin, D. A., Levin, D. T., & Fidler, R. (2004). Unseen and unaware: Implications of recent research on failures of visual awareness for human-computer interface design. Human-Computer Interaction, 19, 389-422.
55. Winer, G. A., & Cottrell, J. E. (2004). The odd belief that rays exit the eye during vision. In D. T. Levin (Ed.), Thinking and seeing: Visual metacognition in adults and children (pp. 97-119). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
56. Woods, D. D., & Roth, E. M. (1988). Cognitive systems engineering. In M. Helander (Ed.) Handbook of human-computer interaction (pp. 1-41). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers B. V. (North-Holland).