Literature DB >> 22648655

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

George E Newman1, Brian J Scholl.   

Abstract

Perhaps the most common method of depicting data, in both scientific communication and popular media, is the bar graph. Bar graphs often depict measures of central tendency, but they do so asymmetrically: A mean, for example, is depicted not by a point, but by the edge of a bar that originates from a single axis. Here we show that this graphical asymmetry gives rise to a corresponding cognitive asymmetry. When viewers are shown a bar depicting a mean value and are then asked to judge the likelihood of a particular data point being part of its underlying distribution, viewers judge points that fall within the bar as being more likely than points equidistant from the mean, but outside the bar--as if the bar somehow "contained" the relevant data. This "within-the-bar bias" occurred (a) for graphs with and without error bars, (b) for bars that originated from both lower and upper axes, (c) for test points with equally extreme numeric labels, (d) both from memory (when the bar was no longer visible) and in online perception (while the bar was visible during the judgment), (e) both within and between subjects, and (f) in populations including college students, adults from the broader community, and online samples. We posit that this bias may arise due to principles of object perception, and we show how it has downstream implications for decision making.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22648655     DOI: 10.3758/s13423-012-0247-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev        ISSN: 1069-9384


  6 in total

1.  Bars and lines: a study of graphic communication.

Authors:  J Zacks; B Tversky
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1999-11

Review 2.  Objects and attention: the state of the art.

Authors:  B J Scholl
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2001-06

3.  The role of closure in defining the "objects" of object-based attention.

Authors:  Alexandria C Marino; Brian J Scholl
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  2005-10

4.  Risk avoidance: graphs versus numbers.

Authors:  Hannah Faye Chua; J Frank Yates; Priti Shah
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2006-03

5.  Automatic, stimulus-driven attentional capture by objecthood.

Authors:  Ruth Kimchi; Yaffa Yeshurun; Aliza Cohen-Savransky
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2007-02

6.  Shifting visual attention between objects and locations: evidence from normal and parietal lesion subjects.

Authors:  R Egly; J Driver; R D Rafal
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  1994-06
  6 in total
  10 in total

1.  Meeting the challenge of the Psychonomic Society's 2012 Guidelines on Statistical Issues: Some success and some room for improvement.

Authors:  Peter E Morris; Catherine O Fritz
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2017-12

2.  Error Bars Considered Harmful: Exploring Alternate Encodings for Mean and Error.

Authors:  Michael Correll; Michael Gleicher
Journal:  IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 4.579

3.  Two graphs walk into a bar: Readout-based measurement reveals the Bar-Tip Limit error, a common, categorical misinterpretation of mean bar graphs.

Authors:  Sarah H Kerns; Jeremy B Wilmer
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2021-11-01       Impact factor: 2.240

Review 4.  Reveal, Don't Conceal: Transforming Data Visualization to Improve Transparency.

Authors:  Tracey L Weissgerber; Stacey J Winham; Ethan P Heinzen; Jelena S Milin-Lazovic; Oscar Garcia-Valencia; Zoran Bukumiric; Marko D Savic; Vesna D Garovic; Natasa M Milic
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2019-10-28       Impact factor: 29.690

Review 5.  Decision making with visualizations: a cognitive framework across disciplines.

Authors:  Lace M Padilla; Sarah H Creem-Regehr; Mary Hegarty; Jeanine K Stefanucci
Journal:  Cogn Res Princ Implic       Date:  2018-07-11

6.  Best Graph Type to Compare Discrete Groups: Bar, Dot, and Tally.

Authors:  Fang Zhao; Robert Gaschler
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2021-12-24

7.  Replacing bar graphs of continuous data with more informative graphics: are we making progress?

Authors:  Nico Riedel; Robert Schulz; Vartan Kazezian; Tracey Weissgerber
Journal:  Clin Sci (Lond)       Date:  2022-08-12       Impact factor: 6.876

8.  Hypothetical Outcome Plots Outperform Error Bars and Violin Plots for Inferences about Reliability of Variable Ordering.

Authors:  Jessica Hullman; Paul Resnick; Eytan Adar
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-11-16       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Thinking Outside the Box: Developing Dynamic Data Visualizations for Psychology with Shiny.

Authors:  David A Ellis; Hannah L Merdian
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2015-12-01

10.  Effects of ensemble and summary displays on interpretations of geospatial uncertainty data.

Authors:  Lace M Padilla; Ian T Ruginski; Sarah H Creem-Regehr
Journal:  Cogn Res Princ Implic       Date:  2017-10-04
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.