The DOI matches its Crossref record; 64 of the 64 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Proximity Compatibility Principle: Its Psychological Foundation and Relevance to Display Design
Abstract
In this report we describe the concept of the proximity compatibility principle (PCP) and demonstrate its relevance to display design: Displays relevant to a common task or mental operation (close task or mental proximity) should be rendered close together in perceptual space (close display proximity). Different forms of task proximity are discussed, as are the different information-processing mechanisms that underlie the effects of the several different design manipulations of display proximity. Experimental data that support this process-based elaboration of PCP are then reviewed in design contexts relating to aviation, graphs, display layout, and decision aiding.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A feature-integration theory of attention.
Treisman, A. M., & Gelade, G. (1980) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(80)90005-5 · Cited by 12,366
Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task
Eriksen, B. A., & Eriksen, C. W. (1974) · Perception & Psychophysics · doi:10.3758/bf03203267 · Cited by 7,230
Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: An integrative review.
MacLeod, C. M. (1991) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.109.2.163 · Cited by 5,500
Handbook of perception and human performance
Boff, K. R., Kaufman, L., & Thomas, J. P. (1986) · Wiley eBooks · Cited by 4,031
The reviewing of object files: Object-specific integration of information
Kahneman, D., Treisman, A., & Gibbs, B. J. (1992) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(92)90007-o · Cited by 2,218
The Processing of Information and Structure
Royer, F. L., & Garner, W. R. (1974) · The American Journal of Psychology · doi:10.2307/1421985 · Cited by 2,117
Pittenger, J. B., Kubovy, M., & Pomerantz, J. R. (1982) · The American Journal of Psychology · doi:10.2307/1422146 · Cited by 1,415
Allocation of attention in the visual field.
Eriksen, C. W., & Yeh, Y. (1985) · Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception & Performance · doi:10.1037//0096-1523.11.5.583 · Cited by 1,088
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
Chronometric analysis of classification.
Posner, M. I., & Mitchell, R. F. (1967) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0024913 · Cited by 794
Cited by
Design Features of Graphs in Health Risk Communication: A Systematic Review
Ancker, J. S., Senathirajah, Y., Kukafka, R., & Starren, J. B. (2006) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1197/jamia.m2115 · Cited by 548
Cronin, M. A., Gonzalez, C., & Sterman, J. D. (2009) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2008.03.003 · Cited by 347
Reimsbach, D., Hahn, R., & Gürtürk, A. (2018) · European Accounting Review · doi:10.1080/09638180.2016.1273787 · Cited by 304
Zahabi, M., Kaber, D. B., & Swangnetr, M. (2015) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1177/0018720815576827 · Cited by 240
Phansalkar, S., Edworthy, J., Hellier, E., Seger, D. L., Schedlbauer, A., Avery, A. J., & Bates, D. W. (2010) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1136/jamia.2010.005264 · Cited by 226
Metadata
- Authors
- Wickens, C. D., & Carswell, C. M.
- Venue
- Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1995-09
- Volume
- 37
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 473-494
- ISSN
- 0018-7208 (ISSN-L)
- 1547-8181
- OpenAlex
- W2053229400
- Cited by
- 655
- References
- 64
- FWCI
- 17.79
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Proximity Compatibility Principle: Its Psychological Foundation and Relevance to Display Design. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1518/001872095779049408
- The paper
- Wickens, C. D., & Carswell, C. M. (1995). The Proximity Compatibility Principle: Its Psychological Foundation and Relevance to Display Design. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872095779049408
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
