The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Display Proximity in Multicue Information Integration: The Benefits of Boxes
Abstract
This study investigates the ability of an individual to integrate probabilistic information from a number of sources, and focuses particularly on the extent to which this integration is influenced by display proximity in space, time, and object configuration. In support of the principle of compatibility of proximity, the data indicated that integration performance was clearly ordered according to the degree of display integrality: those in the more integral rectangle conditions were significantly better at integration than those in the bar graph condition. Proximity of space had little effect upon performance, whereas proximity in time significantly improved performance in all three format conditions. Speed stress significantly hindered performance in all three format conditions. Finally, memory for isolated unintegrated attributes of a cue was not harmed by the increasing integrality of the rectangle formats.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The form in which information is presented does not directly determine which level of cognitive control will be activated.
“The reason for this is that the form in which information is presented does not directly determine which level of cognitive control will be activated (cf. [35, 79]).”
From Ecological interface design: theoretical foundations (1992) · cites this paper as [35]
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 26
- Anderson, N. H., 1981, Foundations of information integration theory
- Barnett, B., 1986, The object display in decision making and judgment
- Boff, K. R., 1986, Handbook of perception & human performance
- Boles, D. B., 1983, A comparison of homogeneous and heterogeneous display formats in information integration and nonintegration tasks
- Carswell, C. M., and Wickens, C. D. (in press). Information integration and the object display. Ergonomics.
- Casey, E. J., 1986, Visual display representation of multidimensional system
- 10.1145/22627.22354 · DOI
- Coury, B. G. Boulette, M. D. Zubritzky, M. C., and Fisher, D. L. (1986). Classification of multidimensional data: Evaluating displays to aid identification of system state. In Proceedings of the 1986 International Conferencec on Systems, Man and Cybernetics (pp. 1503–1508). New York: IEEE.
- 10.3758/BF03199285 · DOI
- 10.1037/h0029456 · DOI
- Garner, W. R., 1974, The processing of information and structure
- 10.1016/0010-0285(70)90016-2 · DOI
- Goettl, B. P. Kramer, A. F., and Wickens, C. D. (1986). Display format and the perception of numerical data. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 30th Annual Meeting (pp. 450–454). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors Society. · DOI
- Goldsmith, T., 1984, Human factors in computer systems, 243
- 10.1177/001872087601800207 · DOI
- 10.1109/TR.1973.5215934 · DOI
- Jones, P., 1986, The display of multivariate information: The effects of auto and cross correlation, display format, and reliability
- Lopes, L. L., 1981, Averaging rules & adjustment processes: The role of averaging in inference
- 10.1146/annurev.ps.35.020184.001035 · DOI
- Pomerantz, J. R., 1981, Perceptual organization, 141
- 10.1177/001872087501700208 · DOI
- 10.1037/h0030640 · DOI
- Wickens, C. D., 1986, The object display: Principles and a review of experimental findings
- Wickens, C. D., 1985, Display/cognitive interface: The effect of information integration requirements on display formatting for C3 displays
- Wickens, C. D., 1983, A comparison of verbal and graphical information presentation in a complex information integration task
- Woods, D. Wise, J., and Hanes, L. (1981). An evaluation of nuclear power plant safety parameter display systems. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 25th Annual Meeting (pp. 110-114). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors Society. · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Ecological interface design: theoretical foundations
Vicente, K. J., & Rasmussen, J. (1992) · IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics · doi:10.1109/21.156574 · Cited by 1,084
Object displays do not always support better integrated task performance
Sanderson, P. M., Flach, J. M., Buttigieg, M. A., & Casey, E. J. (1989) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1177/001872088903100207 · Cited by 134
Choi, P., & Coulter, K. S. (2012) · Journal of Retailing · doi:10.1016/j.jretai.2012.04.001 · Cited by 36
Metadata
- Authors
- Barnett, B. J., & Wickens, C. D.
- Affiliations
- University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
- Venue
- Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1988-02
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 15-24
- ISSN
- 0018-7208 (ISSN-L)
- 1547-8181
- OpenAlex
- W2162312462
- Cited by
- 104
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2024: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 14.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Human Factors The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Graphics and Computer-Aided Design › Data Visualization and Analytics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
- Keywords
- display format, bar charts, rectangles, information display design
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
