Bar graphs depicting averages are perceptually misinterpreted: The within-the-bar bias

Psychonomic Bulletin and Review

Volumn 19, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 601-607

  Newman, George E ^a   Scholl, Brian J ^b  

^a YALE SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT   (United States)

^b YALE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Decision making; Graph perception; Object based attention; Statistical reasoning

Indexed keywords

EID: 84864106557     PISSN: 10699384     EISSN: 15315320     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/s13423-012-0247-5     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Chabris, C. F., & Kosslyn, S. M. (2005). Representational correspondence as a basic principle of diagram design. In S.-O. Tergan & T. Keller (Eds.), Knowledge and information visualization: Searching for synergies (pp. 36-57). Berlin: Springer.
2. Chua, H. F., Yates, J. F., & Shah, P. (2006). Risk avoidance: Graphs versus numbers. Memory & Cognition, 34, 399-410. doi: 10. 3758/BF03193417.
3. Egly, R., Driver, J., & Rafal, R. (1994). Shifting visual attention between objects and locations: Evidence from normal and parietal lesion subjects. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General, 123, 161-177. doi: 10. 1037/0096-3445. 123. 2. 161.
4. Fischer, M. H. (2000). Do irrelevant depth cues affect the comprehension of bar graphs? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 14, 151-162.
5. Gigerenzer, G., Swijtink, Z., Porter, T., Daston, L., Beatty, J., & Krüger, L. (1989). The empire of chance: How probability changed science and everyday life. Cambridge, U. K.: Cambridge University Press.
6. Gillan, D. J., & Richman, E. H. (1994). Miminalism and the syntax of graphs. Human Factors, 36, 619-644.
7. Kimchi, R., Yeshurun, Y., & Cohen-Savransky, A. (2007). Automatic, stimulus-driven attentional capture by objecthood. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 166-172. doi: 10. 3758/BF03194045.
8. Kosslyn, S. M. (2006). Graph design for the eye and mind. Oxford, U. K.: Oxford University Press.
9. Marino, A. C., & Scholl, B. J. (2005). The role of closure in defining the "objects" of object-based attention. Perception & Psychophysics, 67, 1140-1149. doi: 10. 3758/BF03193547.
10. Scholl, B. J. (2001). Objects and attention: The state of the art. Cognition, 80, 1-46. doi: 10. 1016/S0010-0277(00)00152-9.
11. Stone, E. R., Sieck, W. R., Bull, B. E., Yates, J. F., Parks, S. C., & Rush, C. J. (2003). Foreground: background salience: Explaining the effects of graphical displays on risk avoidance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 90, 19-36.
12. Stone, E. R., Yates, J. F., & Parker, A. M. (1997). Effects of numerical and graphical displays on professed risk-taking behavior. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Applied, 3, 243-256. doi: 10. 1037/1076-898X. 3. 4. 243.
13. Tufte, E. (1983). The visual display of quantitative information. Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press.
14. 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. doi: 10. 1037/1076-898X. 4. 2. 119.
15. Zacks, J., & Tversky, B. (1999). Bars and lines: A study of graphic communication. Memory & Cognition, 27, 1073-1079. doi: 10. 3758/BF03201236.