Linear Versus Branching Depictions of Evolutionary History: Implications for Diagram Design

Topics in Cognitive Science

Volumn 3, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 536-559

  Novick, Laura R ^a   Shade, Courtney K ^a   Catley, Kefyn M ^b  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b WESTERN CAROLINA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Biology education; Cladograms; Diagrammatic format; Evolution; Historical representations; Phylogeny; Reasoning; Tree thinking

Indexed keywords

COMPREHENSION; EVOLUTION; FEMALE; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MALE; STANDARDS; TEACHING; VISION;

BIOLOGICAL EVOLUTION; COMPREHENSION; DATA DISPLAY; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; TEACHING MATERIALS; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 79960285903     PISSN: 17568757     EISSN: 17568765     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1756-8765.2009.01077.x     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Baum, D. A., Smith, S. D., & Donovan, S. S. (2005). The tree-thinking challenge. Science, 310, 979-980.
2. Bishop, B. A., & Anderson, C. W. (1990). Student conceptions of natural selection and its role in evolution. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27, 415-427.
3. Catley, K. M. (2006). Darwin's missing link: A new paradigm for evolution education. Science Education, 90, 767-783.
4. Catley, K. M., & Novick, L. R. (2008). Seeing the wood for the trees: An analysis of evolutionary diagrams in biology textbooks. BioScience, 58, 976-987.
5. Catley, K. M., Novick, L. R., & Shade, C. K. (in press). Interpreting evolutionary diagrams: when topology and process conflict. Journal of Research in Science Teaching.
6. Chiras, D. D. (2002). Human biology: Health, homeostasis, and the environment (4th ed.). Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett.
7. Clark, C. A. (2001). Evolution for John Doe: Pictures, the public, and the Scopes trial debate. The Journal of American History, 87, 1275-1303.
8. Corter, J. E., Nickerson, J. V., Tversky, B., Zahner, D., & Rho, Y. J. (2008). Using diagrams to design information systems. In B. C. Love, K. McRae, & V. M. Sloutsky (Eds.), Proceedings of the thirtieth annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 2259-2264). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
9. Evander, R. L. (1989). Phylogeny of the family Equidae. In D. R. Prothero & R. M. Schoch (Eds.), The evolution of Perissodactyls (pp. 109-127). New York: Oxford University Press.
10. Evans, E. M. (2001). Cognitive and contextual factors in the emergence of diverse belief systems: Creation versus evolution. Cognitive Psychology, 42, 217-266.
11. Foley, R. (1987). Hominid species and stone-tool assemblages: How are they related? Antiquity, 61, 380-392.
12. Goldsmith, D.W. (2003). Presenting cladistic thinking to biology majors and general science students. The American Biology Teacher, 65, 679-682.
13. Gould, S. J. (1995). Ladders and cones: Constraining evolution by canonical icons. In R. B. Silver (Ed.), Hidden histories of science (pp. 37-67). New York: NYREV.
14. Hegarty, M., Carpenter, P. A., & Just, M. A. (1991). Diagrams in the comprehension of scientific texts. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 2, pp. 641-668). New York: Longman.
15. Hurley, S. M., & Novick, L. R. (in press). Solving problems using matrix, network, and hierarchy diagrams: The consequences of violating construction conventions. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology.
16. Johnson, G. B. (1998). Biology: Visualizing life. Austin, TX: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
17. Johnson, G. B., & Raven, P. H. (2001). Biology: Principles & explorations. Austin, TX: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
18. Kellman, P. J. (2000). An update on Gestalt psychology. In B. Landau, J. Sabini, J. Jonides, & E. Newport (Eds.), Perception, cognition, and language: Essays in honor of Henry and Lila Gleitman. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
19. Lynch, M. (1990). The externalized retina: Selection and mathematization in the visual documentation of objects in the life sciences. In M. Lynch & S. Woolgar (Eds.), Representation in scientific practice (pp. 153-186). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
20. McKim, R. H. (1980). Thinking visually: A strategy manual for problem solving. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
21. Novick, L. R. (2001). Spatial diagrams: Key instruments in the toolbox for thought. In D. L. Medin (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 40, pp. 279-325). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
22. Novick, L. R. (2006a). The importance of both diagrammatic conventions and domain-specific knowledge for diagram literacy in science: The hierarchy as an illustrative case. In D. Barker-Plummer, R. Cox, & N. Swoboda (Eds.), Diagrammatic representation and inference (Diagrams 2006), LNAI 4045 (pp. 1-11). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
23. Novick, L. R. (2006b). Understanding spatial diagram structure: An analysis of hierarchies, matrices, and networks. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 1826-1856.
24. Novick, L. R., & Catley, K. M. (2007). Understanding phylogenies in biology: The influence of a Gestalt perceptual principle. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 13, 197-223.
25. Novick, L. R., & Hurley, S. M. (2001). To matrix, network, or hierarchy: That is the question. Cognitive Psychology, 42, 158-216.
26. O'Hara, R. J. (1988). Homage to Clio, or, toward an historical philosophy for evolutionary biology. Systematic Zoology, 37, 142-155.
27. Ringe, D., Warnow, T., & Taylor, A. (2002). Indo-European and computational cladistics. Transactions of the Philological Society, 100, 59-129.
28. Shtulman, A. (2006). Qualitative difference between naïve and scientific theories of evolution. Cognitive Psychology, 52, 170-194.
29. Taylor, H. A., & Tversky, B. (1992). Descriptions and depictions of environments. Memory & Cognition, 20, 483-496.
30. van Tuijl, H. F. J. M. (1980). Perceptual interpretation of complex line patterns. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 6, 197-221.
31. Tversky, B., Zacks, J., Lee, P. U., & Heiser, J. (2000). Lines, blobs, crosses and arrows. In M. Anderson, P. Cheng, & V. Haarslev (Eds.), Theory and application of diagrams (pp. 221-230). Edinburgh: Springer.
32. Zacks, J., & Tversky, B. (1999). Bars and lines: A study of graphic communication. Memory & Cognition, 27, 1073-1079.