Making Sense of Time-Series Data: How Language Can Help Identify Long-Term Trends

Proceedings of the 37th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, CogSci 2015

Volumn , Issue , 2015, Pages 872-877

  Harold, Jordan ^a   Coventry, Kenny R ^a   Lorenzoni, Irene ^b   Shipley, Thomas F ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EAST ANGLIA   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF EAST ANGLIA   (United Kingdom)

^c TEMPLE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

graph comprehension; language; visual attention

Indexed keywords

BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; CLIMATE CHANGE; EYE MOVEMENTS; GRAPH THEORY; LINGUISTICS; TIME SERIES; VISUAL LANGUAGES;

GRAPH COMPREHENSIONS; LANGUAGE; LINEGRAPH; LONG-TERM TREND; PILOT STUDIES; REAL-WORLD; REAL-WORLD TIME SERIES; SENSE OF TIME; TIME-SERIES DATA; VISUAL ATTENTION;

EYE TRACKING;

EID: 84997444573     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (19)

1. Ali, N., & Peebles, D. (2013). The effect of gestalt laws of perceptual organization on the comprehension of three-variable bar and line graphs. Human Factors, 55(1), 183-203.
2. Brunyé, T. T., & Taylor, H. A. (2009). When goals constrain: Eye movements and memory for goal‐oriented map study. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23(6), 772-787.
3. Carpenter, P. A., & Shah, P. (1998). A model of the perceptual and conceptual processes in graph comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 4(2), 75-100.
4. Carswell, C. M., Emery, C., & Lonon, A. M. (1993). Stimulus complexity and information integration in the spontaneous interpretations of line graphs. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 7(4), 341-357.
5. Feist, M. I., & Gentner, D. (2007). Spatial language influences memory for spatial scenes. Memory & Cognition, 35(2), 283-296.
6. Freedman, E. G., & Shah, P. (2002). Toward a model of knowledge-based graph comprehension. In M. Hegarty, B. Meyer, & N. H. Narayanan (Eds.), LNAI 2317: Diagrammatic Representation and Inference. Berlin, Germany: Springer.
7. Glazer, N. (2011). Challenges with graph interpretation: A review of the literature. Studies in Science Education, 47(2), 183-210.
8. Hegarty, M. (2011). The cognitive science of visual‐spatial displays: Implications for design. Topics in Cognitive Science, 3(3), 446-474.
9. Hoffman, D. D., & Richards, W. A. (1984). Parts of recognition. Cognition, 18(1), 65-96.
10. IPCC (2013). Summary for Policymakers. In T.F. Stocker, D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, et al. (Eds.), Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, UK and New York, USA: Cambridge University Press.
11. Kosslyn, S. M. (1989). Understanding charts and graphs. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 3(3), 185-226.
12. Loewenstein, J., & Gentner, D. (2005). Relational language and the development of relational mapping. Cognitive Psychology, 50(4), 315-353.
13. Peebles, D., & Cheng, P. (2003). Modeling the effect of task and graphical representation on response latency in a graph reading task. Human Factors, 45(1), 28-46.
14. Rothkopf, C. A., Ballard, D. H., & Hayhoe M. M. (2007). Task and context determine where you look. Journal of Vision, 7(14), 16, 1-20.
15. Schwert, G. W. (2011). Stock volatility during the recent financial crisis. European Financial Management, 17(5), 789-805.
16. Shah, P., Mayer, R. E., & Hegarty, M. (1999). Graphs as aids to knowledge construction: Signaling techniques for guiding the process of graph comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(4), 690-702.
17. Subak, S. (2003). Effects of climate on variability in Lyme disease incidence in the northeastern United States. American Journal of Epidemiology, 157(6), 531-538.
18. Yarbus, A. L. (1967). Eye movements and vision. New York, USA: Plenum Press.
19. Zacks, J., & Tversky, B. (1999). Bars and lines: A study of graphic communication. Memory & Cognition, 27(6), 1073-1079.