Int J HumanComputer Studies    doi

Int J HumanComputer Studies doi - Description

J HumanComputer Studies 2002 57 247262 doi101006ijhc1017 Available online at httpwwwidealibrarycomon Animationcanitfacilitate arbara verskyand ulie auer orrison Department of Psychology Jordan Hall B ID: 35749 Download Pdf

118K - views

Int J HumanComputer Studies doi

J HumanComputer Studies 2002 57 247262 doi101006ijhc1017 Available online at httpwwwidealibrarycomon Animationcanitfacilitate arbara verskyand ulie auer orrison Department of Psychology Jordan Hall B

Similar presentations

Download Pdf

Int J HumanComputer Studies doi

Download Pdf - The PPT/PDF document "Int J HumanComputer Studies doi" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.

Presentation on theme: "Int J HumanComputer Studies doi"— Presentation transcript:

Page 1
Int. J. Human-Computer Studies (2002) 57, 247262 doi:10.1006/ijhc.1017 Available online at Animation:canitfacilitate? arbara verskyand ulie auer orrison Department of Psychology, Jordan Hall; Bldg. #420 Stanford, CA 94305-2130 USA. email: bt{julie} ireille etrancourt I.N.R.I.A. Rhone-Alpes, 655, Av. de l Europe, 38330 Montbonnot St-Martin, France. email: (Received 1 March 2001 and accepted in revised form 4 April 2002) Graphics have been used since ancient times to portray things that are

inherently spatiovisual) like maps and building plans. More recently) graphics have been used to portray things that are metaphorically spatiovisual) like graphs and organizational charts.Theassumptionisthatgraphicscanfacilitatecomprehension)learning)memory) communication and inference. Assumptions aside) research on static graphics has shownthatonlycarefullydesignedandappropriategraphicsprovetobebeneficialfor conveying complex systems. /ffective graphics conform to the 0ongruence 1rinciple according to which the content and format of the graphic should correspond to the

contentandformatoftheconceptstobeconveyed.2romthis)itfollowsthatanimated graphics should be effective in portraying change over time. 3et the research on the efficacy of animated over static graphics is not encouraging. 4n cases where animated graphics seem superior to static ones) scrutiny reveals lack of equivalence between animated and static graphics in content or procedures6 the animated graphics convey more information or involve interactivity. Animations of events may be ineffective because animations violate the second principle of good graphics) the Apprehension

1rinciple)accordingtowhichgraphicsshouldbeaccuratelyperceivedandappropriately conceived. Animations are often too complex or too fast to be accurately perceived. Moreover) many continuous events are conceived of as sequences of discrete steps. Judicioususeofinteractivitymayovercomeboththesedisadvantages.Animationsmay be more effective than comparable static graphics in situations other than conveying complex systems) for example) for real timereorientations intime andspace. 2002 1ublished by/lsevier 7cience 8td. 1. Graphics:TheCongruencePrinciple 1.1. 79M/ 2:;0T49;7 92 GRA1=407 The enthusiasm

for graphics of all kinds rests on the belief that they benefit comprehension and learning) and foster insight (their proponents include 8evie & 8entz)1?8268arkin&7imon)1?876Ainn)1?87)1?8?68evin&Mayer)1??B67chnotz 1071CD81?/02/ECseefrontmatter 20021ublishedby /lsevier7cience8td. JulieBauerMorrisonis nowat Bryant0ollege)7mithfield)R4.
Page 2
& Fulhavy) 1??46 Tversky) 1??D) 20016 7caife & Rogers) 1??6). Many advantages of graphics have been proposed. Graphics provide an additional way of representing information6 two codes) pictorial and verbal) are better than one.

Graphics may be aestheticallyappealingorhumorous)attractingattentionandmaintainingmotivation. Graphics)asthesayinggoes)maysavewordsbyshowingthingsthatwouldotherwise need many words to describe. This especially holds for faces) maps) systems) and the like that are naturally spatial and hard to describe or visualize. 7ince shepherds first notchedstickstokeeptrackoftheirflocksorhuntersbenttreestorememberaroute) graphics have been used to record information) historical) political) economic and personal. 7uch records have appeared in myriad forms) including tallies) notches and

tokens(e.g.Gelb) 1?6B67chmandtCBesserat)1??2).Analysisofthesegraphics)ancient andmodern)revealscommonusesofspaceandthethingsinittoconveyotherconcepts (Tversky) 1??D) 2001). Graphics use visual elements and the spatial relations among them to represent elements and relations that may be visuospatial) or may be metaphorically visuospatial) applying the power of spatial inference to other domains (8arkin & 7imon) 1?876 Tversky) 1??D) 2001). Thus) another function of graphic displaysistousespacetoorganizeinformationandtofacilitatememoryandinference. 0omputer menus are a familiar modern example)

but using space to organize and remember is also an ancient practice (e.g. Bower) 1?706 7mall) 1??76 3ates) 1?6?). Graphicsexternalize internalknowledge.Thishasatleasttwobenefits. Thebenefitto the individualmind isreducingthe burdenonmemoryandprocessing byoffCloading. Thebenefittogroupsofmindsisjointconsiderationofthesamesetofideasaswellas collectiverevisionofthem.2inally)graphicshavebeenusedtopromoteinferenceand discovery by making the underlying structures and processes transparent (e.g. Hwyer) 1?786 8arkin & 7imon) 1?876 Mayer) 1?8?6 Bauer & JohnsonC8aird) 1??B6 Tessler)

4wasaki & Fincho 8aw) 1??D). 4nterestingly) for these purposes) simple graphics with lessdetailareoftenmoreeffectivethanmorerealisticones(e.g.Hwyer)1?78))provided that they abstract the essential conceptual information. 1.2. I47:A84JAT49;7 92 T=/ I474B8/ A;H 92 T=/ AB7TRA0T Graphicdisplayscanbelooselydividedintotwokinds:thosethatportraythingsthat areessentiallyvisuospatial)likemaps)moleculesandarchitecturaldrawings)andthose that represent things that are not inherently visual) like organization charts) flow diagrams) and graphs. Graphics that portray essentially visual or spatial

information have a clear and obvious advantage over other means of conveying that same information) notably language) in that they use space to convey space. This natural correspondence does not mean that all space to space graphics are immediately understood. 0ertain aspects of maps are difficult for children (He 8oach) Miller & Rosengren)1??768iben)1???)andevenadults)especiallythreeCdimensionaldepictions (e.g. Gobert) 1???6 2ontaine) 2001). 4n spite of the natural correspondences mapping space to space) there are situations where clear language is as effective as graphics (e.g. Taylor

& Tversky) 1??2). Graphics that portray things that are not inherently visuospatial rely on spatial metaphors. 1ictorial elements can represent abstract meanings through KKfigures of depiction$$) for example) metonymy) where a concrete associaterepresentsanabstractconcept)suchastheAhite=ouseforthepresidencyor B.T VERSKY ET AL. 248
Page 3
apairofscissorsforKKdelete$$.7patialproximityisthebasicmetaphorunderlyingusing spacetoexpressabstractrelations.Histanceinspaceconveysdistanceonsomeabstract dimension) such as time) preference) cost orcausality (e.g. Tversky) 1??D) 2001).

Graphicsportrayingthingsthatareessentiallyvisualareinventionsthatareancient andwidespreadacrossmanycultures.Graphicsthatusefiguresofdepictiontoconvey abstract concepts are also ancient. 4n fact) the origins of written language are in pictures.4ncontrast)graphicsthatusespacetoconveynonspatialrelationsare)forthe most part) recent Aestern inventions (e.g. Beniger & Robyn) 1?786 Tufte) 1?8B6 0arswell&Aickens)1?88).Giventhatgraphicscanportrayelementsandrelationsthat are not spatial as well as those that are spatial) their efficacy in learning and

communicationshouldbe)andis)broad.4nfact)itseemsthatitisdifficulttocapture thevastliteratureoneffectsofdiagramsonlearningwithasummarylessgeneralthan graphics aid learning when they present the same information as text in a different formatandalsowhentheypresentinformationcomplementarytotextualinformation (e.g. 8evie & 8entz) 1?82). 1.B. ;AT:RA8 09G;4T4I/ 09RR/719;H/;0/7 4; GRA1=407: T=/ 09;GR:/;0/ 1R4;0418/ Thebenefitsofgraphicsareapparentfrom their ubiquityandintheir naturalness.By naturalness) we mean a convergence of inventions across cultures and ages for using space to

represent space and to represent abstract concepts that suggest cognitive correspondences between mental spaces and real ones. The pictorial languages and petroglyphs found all over the world are one example (e.g. Mallery) 18?B/1?726 Gelb) 1?6B6=arley&Aoodward)1?87)1??260oulmas)1?8?6He2rancis)1?8?6Aoodward& 8ewis) 1??4). The manner of schematizing people) animals) rivers) mountains) foods and houses bear striking similarities across cultures. 4nterestingly) these early written communications resemble contemporary attempts at inventing writing by preliterate children (Fellogg) 1?6?6 Goodnow)

1?776 TolchinskyC8andsman & 8evin) 1?87). 7imilarities in crossCcultural and developmental attempts to externalize mathematical conceptshavebeenobservedby=ughes(1?86)andforgeographicconcepts)especially depictionsofhills)byAood(1??2).2orthemostpart)thesegraphiccommunications haveusedpictorialelements.:seofspatialrelationstoexpresstemporal)quantitative and preference relations was evident in children as young as D and in children from diversecultures(Tversky)Fugelmass&Ainter)1??1).:seofspacehasbeensystematic across young inventors who have used primarily horizontal and vertical lines) with

increases going upwards or to left or right. 4nventors young and old naturally map increasing rates onto increasing slopes (Gattis & =olyoak) 1??66 Gattis) 2001). These naturalcognitivecorrespondencesarecapturedinthe Congruence Principle foreffective graphics:thestructureandcontentoftheexternalrepresentationshouldcorrespondto the desired structure and content ofthe internal representation. 1.4. GRA1=407 G99H A;H ;9T 79 G99H Aithrecentrapidadvancesintechnologyandwithincreasingcontactamong cultures not sharing spoken languages) graphic devices have proliferated. =owever) the A;4MAT49;:0A;

4T2A0484TAT/L 24?
Page 4
advances in the technology of producing attractive graphics often seem to drive and outstrip the development of tools and devices rather than research on their utility. Graphicsarenotalwayseffective)orputdifferently)notallgraphicsareeffectiveinall situations.4nfact)theearlyresearchcomparinglearningwithgraphicstolearningwith textalonegavemixedresults)ofteninspiteofenthusiasmforthepictorialdevices(see reviews by 8evin & 8esgold) 1?786 8evie & 8entz) 1?826 Mandl & 8evin) 1?8?). Moreover)muchoftheearlyresearchusedglobalcomparisonsbetweenmediaanddid not address

the subtler questions of what accounted for the facilitation when it occurred. As research progressed) the types of situations) graphics) tasks and learners for which graphics are effective has become clearer. ThreeCdimensional displays are a new case in point. They seem to be everywhere) or at least in software packages) and they do seem to be liked (0arswell) 2rankenberger & Bernhard) 1??16 8evy) Jacks) Tversky & 7chiano) 1??6). =owever) it is simply not clear if BH displays improve performance) speed) accuracy or memory for data (0arswell et al .) 1??16 7pence&8ewandowsky)1??168evy et al

.)1??6).4nsometasks)forexample)memory) there is little difference between BH and 2H displays6 in other tasks) for example) estimation) there is a disadvantage to BH displays (Jacks) 8evy) Tversky & 7chiano) 1??8). 1.D. A;4MAT49; Another of the newer) attractive graphic devices is animation. 9n the surface) animation is compelling. By the 0ongruence 1rinciple) it should be a natural for conveyingconceptsofchange)justasspaceingraphicsisanaturalforconveyingactual space. Animation should) in principle) be effective for expressing processes such as weather patterns or circuit diagrams or the

circulatory system or the mechanics of a bicyclepump. And) justas real space is effective for conveying metaphoric space) real change should be a natural for conveying metaphoric change) such as the spread of culturalinventionslikewriting)agricultureormetallurgy)thetransmissionofcontrolin anorganization)orthechangesinproductionofvariousindustriesovertime.Giventhe breadth of concepts for which animation seems appropriate and the increasing accessibility of computer tools for animating) the enthusiasm for animation is understandable. 1.6. 1R/I4/A Aith this background on graphics in mind) we will

selectively review research on animation(seeBetrancourt&Tversky)2000).KK7electively$$becausesomeofwhathas been called animation has involved other aspects of communication situations) especially interactivity) which is known to benefit learners on its own (e.g. 2erguson &=egarty)1??D).Toevaluateanimation per se )itmustbecomparedtographicsthat do not change with time) as it is change with time that animation adds. The review focuses on uses of animation to teach complex systems) mechanical) biological) physical)operational)computational.4tisinthiscontextthatmostoftheevaluationsof

animation have been done. There are other uses of animation) especially in computer interfaces) and these will be considered briefly at the end. This review will not B.T VERSKY ET AL. 2D0
Page 5
provide encouragement for the enthusiasm for animation. That leaves us with a need to explain why animation has not produced the expected benefits. To account for the failures of animation) we step back and take a closer look at how people perceive and comprehend real animations. Aith human perceptual and cognitive limitations in mind) we turn again to the basic question: Ahen

will animation be effectiveL 1.7. F4;H7 92 A;4MAT49;7 9f course) change over time occurs in many different ways) and hence is conveyed by animations differing in complexity. 1erhaps the simplest movement is a path or trajectory. This can be animated as the movement of a dot) providing that the features of the moving object are not relevant. Representing the speed and manner of the moving object may require richer animations. 7ometimes what needs to be conveyed is more complex than a path) for example) the movement of parts of an object or system with respect to each other. The movement or

change of either a path or a system may be in two or three dimensions. 4n these cases) movement is of the object or system itself. 4n other cases) the object or system may be stationary) and the movement is of the viewpoint of the observer) in order to show other aspects of the object or system. The critical information to be conveyed determinestheformoftheanimation.But)whatevertheform)inordertobeeffective) an animation must be perceived and comprehended adequately. 0learly) complexity challenges both. 2. Selectivereviewofresearchonanimation 2.1. 4;09M1ARAB8/ 09;T/;T 4; 7TAT40 A;H A;4MAT/H

GRA1=407 4n order to know if animation per se is facilitatory) animated graphics must be comparedtoinformationallyequivalentstaticgraphics.Thatway)thecontributionsof animation can be separated from the contributions of graphics alone without confounding with content. There may be cases where this control is difficult to instantiate) for example) for an animation that shows a complex manner of motion where both spatial position and timing are of the essence. =owever) the cases of incomparabilityreviewedherewerenotthatsubtle.Theyareallcaseswherethestatic

graphicscouldhaveconveyedthesameinformationastheanimatedones.7howingthat studentslearnmaterialbetterwhenitispresentedthanwhenitisnotpresentedshould not bea goal ofempirical research. Anelegantuseofanimationisapairofmovingdashedlinestoillustratedifferences inspeedforrateMtimeNdistanceproblems(Baek&8ayne)1?88).4nthisanimation) theirrelevantaspectsofthesituationwereeliminated)andtheessentialaspectsreduced to dashes moving proportional to speed. Although students learning from the animation outperformed those learning from a static diagram) little can be concluded aboutanimationassuch.The

staticdiagramwas farfromequivalenttotheanimated one6 in particular) it did not take advantage of spatial distance to convey problem distance. /ssentially) the static graphic was a table listing two sets of distances) times A;4MAT49;:0A; 4T2A0484TAT/L 2D1
Page 6
andaveragespeeds.Thus)thereisnowayofknowingiftheanimatedgraphicproduced benefits beyond a comparable static graphic. 8ack of comparability of static and animated diagrams obviate conclusions about the benefits of animation in other studies. 4n a study evaluating graphics for teaching the circulatory system) the

animated diagrams of the heart included blood pathways) but the static diagram did not (8arge) Beheshti) Breuleux & Renaud) 1??6). The static graphics used in Rieber$s (1??0) 1??1 ) computerCbased lesson on ;ewton$s laws of motion did not include information fundamental to understanding the laws. The static graphic for ;ewton$s law of equal and opposite forces depicted the movement of the ball) but not that a single kick to the ball both startedandstoppeditsmotion.Theconceptofinertiaiscriticaltounderstandingthis law)yetcanonlybeextractedfromtheaccompanyingtext.Theanimateddiagram)in

contrast)showedeachkickasitstartedandstoppedtheball$smotion.Although8arge andcolleaguesandRieberbelievetheirfindingssupporttheuseofanimatedgraphics) the lack of equivalence of the static and animated graphics call this conclusion into question. Atfirstglance)forotherstudiesevaluatingstaticandanimatedgraphics)thegraphics appear comparable. But on close examination) the animated graphics present information not available in the static versions) in particular the details of the microsteps between larger steps6 that is) the minute spatialCtemporal actions of components. /vents such as

those portrayed in animations can be reliably segmented into coarser and finerunits by observers (Jacks) Tversky & 4yer) 2001). 2or the most part) the coarse units are segmented by objects or object parts and the fine units by different fineCgrained actions on the same object or part. Many of the static graphics portrayonlythecoarsesegmentswhereastheanimations portrayboththecoarseand fine segments. Thus) there is greater information in the animations than in the static displays.Anybenefits)then)maybeduetotheaddedinformationaloneratherthanthe

formatofthegraphics)informationthatcouldeasilyhavebeenconveyedinthestatic graphics. 4nastudyevaluatingstudents$abilitytolearntheoperationandtroubleshootingof an electronic circuit from a static graphic or from an animated graphic) 1ark and Gittelman (1??2) report better performance in the animated graphic condition. Although both graphics) static and animated) showed the relationships between components in the process) only the animated graphic showed the fine structure. 7pecifically)whenanactionwastakenwiththecircuit)theanimationdepictedthefineC

grainedactionsofthecomponents.Thestaticgraphicshowedthespatialrelationships amongthecomponentsbutdidnotportraythemechanicsofthecircuit$sresponsetoa particular actionandthe consequent changein the circuitstate. Research by Thompson and Riding (1??0) further supports the hypothesis that animation facilitates learning when it presents the fineCgrained actions that static graphicsdonotpresent.Theirprogramtaughtthe1ythagoreantheoremtojuniorhigh schoolstudents.Thegraphicdepictedatriangleandthreesquares)whereeach square sharedoneofthetriangle$ssides.:singshearsandrotations)theprogramshowedthat

theareaofthesquarealongthehypotenusewasthesameasthecombinedareasofthe two other squares. 9ne group viewed a static graphic) a second group saw a discrete animationofthestepsshownonthepapergraphic)andathirdgroupsawacontinuous B.T VERSKY ET AL. 2D2
Page 7
animationofthesteps.Thegroupviewingthecontinuousanimationoutperformedthe other two graphic groups. =owever) the results cannot be taken as showing the superiority of animated over static graphics as the authors explicitly state that the information on the paper graphic was equivalent to the discrete animation) but not equivalent to

the continuous animation. The continuous animation depicted all the lower level actions) while that information had to be inferred from both of the other graphics. 2.2. 4;09M1ARAB8/ 1R90/H:R/7 4; 7TAT40 A;H A;4MAT/H GRA1=407 The lack of equivalent information in static and animated graphics is not the only difficulty in assessing possible benefits from animation. 9ther studies comparing animation have not used equivalent procedures. 4n some studies) the animation conditionallowedinteractivitywhilethe staticcondition didnot)sothatbenefitsmay be due to interactivity rather than

animation (e.g. 7chnotz & Grzondziel) 1???). Anotherfactorknowntofacilitatelearning)prediction)hasalsobeenconfoundedwith animation in some studies. 4n prediction) participants anticipate outcomes) and then view graphics (or read text) to check if their predictions were fulfilled. And) indeed) conditionsthatinvolvebothanimationandpredictionofamechanicalsystemdidyield benefitsbeyondgraphicsthatallowneither(=egarty)Ouilici);arayanan)=olmquist& Moreno) 1???). Because prediction alone is known to facilitate learning) facilitation cannot be attributed to animation. 8ater studies by the

same group showed no benefits of animation per se in understanding the workings of a flushing cistern (=egarty) ;arayanan& 2reitas) 2002). Fieras (1??2) investigated the effects of animated and static graphics on students$ abilitytounderstandtheoperationofanenergysystem)theKK7tarTrek1haserBank$$. 7tudentsstudiedconceptualinformationaboutthesystemintheformoftextorinthe formofstaticoranimateddiagrams.7tudentswholearnedfromtheanimatedgraphic performed significantly better on firing the phaser and diagnosing malfunctions tasks than those who learned from a static graphic or

lacked a graphic. 7tudents with the staticoranimatedgraphics)however)wereallowedtousethegraphicsduringthetest phaseoftheexperiment.Thepresenceofgraphicsduringthetestphasemakesthetask one of reading graphics rather than using the information contained in the graphics. That is) the animated graphic may be facilitating execution of the task rather than understanding ofthe concepts. ;athan) Fintsch and 3oung (1??2) developed an animated interactive program (KKAnimate$$) to help students comprehend algebra word problems. The program is

designedtofacilitateunderstandingoftherelationshipbetweentheformalmathematics ofawordproblemandthesituationdescribedintheproblem.7tudentsintheAnimate conditionwroteaformalequationtosolvetheproblemandthenanimatedtheequation to see if it depicted the expected solution. ;one of the other conditions included graphicsandtwoofthethreeconditionshadinterfacessubstantiallydifferentfromthe Animateinterface.AlthoughperformanceintheAnimateconditionwasbetterthanin theotherthreeconditions)thelackofcomparabilityamongconditionsdoesnotallow any conclusions about the relative efficacy ofanimated graphics.

A;4MAT49;:0A; 4T2A0484TAT/L 2DB
Page 8
2.B. 2A48:R/7 92 A;4MAT49; T9 B/;/24T Ahen examined carefully) then) many of the soCcalled successful applications of animation turn out to be a consequence of a superior visualization for the animated thanthestaticcase)orofsuperiorstudyproceduressuchasinteractivityorprediction thatareknowntoimprovelearningindependentofgraphics.4naddition)theliterature isfilledwithoutrightfailurestofind benefitsofanimation) evenwhen animationisin principle ideal: for conveying change over time (e.g. 7chnotz & Grondziel) 1???). Morrison and

Tversky (2001) compared text with text coupled with either static or animated graphics in a task teaching permissible social paths among people or navigationpathsamongobjects.Graphicsyieldedbetterperformancethantextalone) but only for low spatial ability participants. Across all participants) diagrams that animated the path provided no benefit beyond that of the individual static diagrams. Rieber and =annafin (1?88) and Rieber (1?8?) found no facilitation for animation in teaching;ewton$slawsofmotiontoelementaryschoolstudents.4nonecase)bothtext

andanimationwereusedasorientingactivitiespriortothepresentationofeachsection ofthelesson(Rieber&=annafin)1?88))neitherofwhichhadanyeffect.4nthesecond case)elaboratingthetextuallessonwithadditionaltextand/orno) static)oranimated graphics did not lead to performance differences (Rieber) 1?8?). Rieber) Boyce and Assad(1??0)usedthesamedesigntoevaluatetheperformanceofcollegestudentswhen learning;ewton$slaws.Aswiththeearlierexperimentstherewasnoeffectofgraphic condition.Additionally)providingdifferentformsofpractice)oneinvolvinginteractive animation) had no effect in anyof the three

experiments. 7tudents learning about the production of growth hormones during biotechnology were presented with text alone) a static diagram) or an animated diagram (0han8in) 1??8).Ahenlearningproceduralinformation)suchastheformationofapeptidechain) the studentsviewed asingle static diagram whichcombined information aboutallthe steps in the process. 7tudents in the animation group viewed a series of individual animations depicting each step of the process. 7tudents in both conditions performed equally well. 4n fact) the only difference was between the static and no diagram

conditionforthosestudentswhohadabackgroundinbiology.Allotherconditions)for both biology and nonCbiologystudents)wereequal in terms ofperformance. Asasupplementtoabiologycoursetheyweretaking)juniorhighstudentsinteracted withtheAdvanced0omputingfor7cience/ducation(A07/)environment)whichisa multimedia program incorporating textual information) still graphics) movies) and simulations (1ane) 0orbett & John) 1??6).7tudents using the A07/ program did not perform better than students using static graphics except for a slight advantage for information presented only in the A07/ program and not during

the biology course lectures. Byrne) 0atrambone and 7tasko (1???) tested the effectiveness of animated graphics in teaching college students computer algorithms) specifically depthCfirst searches and binomial heaps. The authors were discouraged to find that the benefits of viewing animated graphics were equivalent to making predictions about the outcomes of the algorithms when provided withstatic graphics. Animatedgraphicsareoftenemployedtoteachstudentshowtouseacomputerora computer program. This is also an area where these animations do not appear to be B.T VERSKY ET AL.

Page 9
effective. Three groups of researchers investigated the role of animation in teaching students how to use a Macintosh computer) how to use the MacHraw graphics editor) and how to use =yper0ard (1ayne) 0hesworth) & =ill) 1??26 Hyck) 1??D6 =arrison)1??D)respectively).4neachcase)presentinganytypeofagraphic)static(only for=arrison)1??D)oranimated)facilitatedperformancewhencomparedtoproviding noinstruction.7tudentsintheanimatedgraphicconditionsdidnotoutperformthosein the equivalent text (1ayne) 0hesworth & =ill) 1??26 Hyck) 1??D) or static graphic (=arrison) 1??D) conditions.

1almiterandcolleaguescomparedanimatedandstillgraphicsforteachingstudents howtouseanonClinehelpsystemfor=ypercard (1almiter)/lkerton&Baggett)1??16 1almiter&/lkerton)1??B).Althoughthestudentsusingtheanimationcompletedthe training task more quickly) they completed the testing task more slowly. Moreover) after a week) performance of students who had studied the text improved) but performance for those who had studied the animation declined. The longCterm facilitationoftextoveranimationwasattributedtodeeperprocessingofthetextthan ofthe animation.

Thus)most)ifnotall)ofthesuccessesofanimationseemtobeduetoadvantagesin extrainformationconveyedoradditionalprocedures)ratherthantheanimationofthe information per se .Animationsareofteninteractive6interactivityisknowntofacilitate performance but it should not be confused with animation (e.g. 2erguson & =egarty) 1??D). Ahen animations fail to benefit learning) their promoters argue that they are attractiveandmotivating)sotheycouldbepreferredjustforthat(1erez&Ahite)1?8D6 Rieber) 1??1 6 7irikasem & 7hebilske) 1??1). =owever) it turns out that animations

frequentlytakemoretime)sotheyhaveacost./venmoredamagingtothemotivation hypothesis is that animations are not universally preferred) and are often not used (e.g. 1ane et al .) 1??6). 2inally) and to foreshadow our next point) many animations) evenelegantandnaturalones)aredifficulttoperceiveandunderstand)exceptperhaps byexpertswithextensiveexperience(e.g.8owe)1???67locum)3oder)Fessler&7luter) 2000).Theconsequenceofthisisthatanimationsmaybedistracting)orevenharmful) to conveying important ideas. 1roviding animated weather maps to novices) for example) only encouraged them to attend to

perceptually salient information. They were unable to use the animations to extract thematically important information) especiallythecausalinformationthatunderliesadequatementalmodelsofthesystem (8owe) 1???). 3. Whydoanimationsfail?TheApprehensionPrinciple Themanyfailurestofindbenefitsofanimationeveninconveyingchangeovertime)a conceptthatseemsideallysuitedtoanimationissurprising)indeed)disappointing)and calls for deeper inquiry into information processing of animation. The drawback of animation may not be the cognitive congruence between the conceptual material and

thevisualpresentationbutratherperceptualandcognitivelimitationsintheprocessing of a changing visual situation. /ffective graphics should conform not only to the 0ongruence1rinciple)butalsotothe Apprehension Principle :thestructureandcontent A;4MAT49;:0A; 4T2A0484TAT/L 2DD
Page 10
of the external representation should be readily and accurately perceived and comprehended. B.1. A;4MAT49;7 MA3 B/ =ARH T9 1/R0/4I/ Generations of masterpieces in galleries and museums all over the world portray the legs of galloping horses incorrectly. Before stopCgap photography) the complex

interactionofhorses$legssimplyhappenedtoofasttobeaccuratelyapprehended./ven when motion is simplified to the path or trajectory of a single object rather than the complex interaction of moving parts) perception of motion may not be accurate. 7ketches of the trajectories of pendula) propelled objects and dropped objects by novicesandexpertsalikeareoftenincorrect)apparentlygovernedmorebyGestaltClike perceptualprinciplesthanlawsofphysics(e.g.0aramazza)Mc0loskey&Green)1?816 Mc0loskey) 1?8B 6 Faiser) 1roffitt) Ahelan & =echt) 1??26 2reyd & Jones) 1??4). 1aths ofmoving objects) for

example) are perceived ascloser tohorizontal orvertical than they actually are (7hiffrar & 7hepard) 1??16 1ani) Jeffres) 7hippey & 7chwartz) 1??6). 2or some kinds of motion) observers can select the correct path from an animation) but still reproduce it incorrectly (Faiser et al .) 1??2). B.2. A;4MAT49;7 MA3 B/ 09M1R/=/;H/H H470R/T/83 /ven when actual motion is smooth and continuous) people may conceive of it as composed of discrete steps Pe.g. =egarty) 1??26 Jacks et al .) 20016 but see 7chwartz (1???) and 7chwartz & Black (1??6) for evidence that for atomic substeps that are

analoginnature)suchastheturningofgears)mentalanimationmaybeanalogaswellQ. 4fmotionisconceivedofindiscretestepsinsteadofcontinuously)thenthenaturalway ofconveyingitistoportrayitindiscretestepsratherthaninacontinuousanimation. Thisisquitecommoninpictorialinstructionsforcomplexmotion)suchasoperatinga machineorassemblinganobject)whereeachstepisportrayedinaseparateframeand theframesareorderedbythesequenceofsteps.2orsimplemotion)asinthepathofan object or the flow of control or electricity through a system) a single diagram can

conveythepath)indicatedbylinesandarrows.4nadditiontocorrespondingtotheway people conceive of animations) multiple diagrams have an additional advantage: they easily allow comparison and reinspection of the details of the actions. By contrast) animationsarefleeting)theydisappear)andwhentheycanbereinspectedtheyusually are reinspected in motion) where itmay bedifficulttoperceive allthe minute changes simultaneously. B.B. 4;T/RA0T4I4T3 0learly) interactivity) a factor known to facilitate learning) can help overcome the difficulties of perception and comprehension. 7topping)

starting and replaying an animation can allow reinspection) focusing on specific parts and actions. Animations that allow closeCups) zooming) alternative perspectives) and control of speed are even more likely to facilitate perception and comprehension. 9f course) the proper experiments have yet to be done) for example) static graphics also allow closeCups B.T VERSKY ET AL. 2D6
Page 11
and perspective switches. 0areful studies will reveal the particular aspects) if any) of animation and interactivitythat facilitate conveying specific concepts. B.4. 0AI/AT7 The work

analyzed here is work on the role of animations teaching complex systems) mechanical) biological) computational. The conclusions are restricted to those situations.Animationsareusedinmany othersituations.0ommonusesofanimation include concrete applications such as walks through environments as well as abstract usessuchasthefillbarindicatingtherateofcompletionofafiledownload(see0ard) Mackinlay & 7hneiderman) 1???) for examples). Although rarely tested in highly controlledexperimentsPseeTan)Robertson)&0zerwinski(2001)foranexceptionthat

usesanimationtoconveychangesinorientationQ)theseusesofrealtimeanimationto convey change in time and space have perhaps passed the test of time. They have appeared in many interfaces for many years6 one would think that if they caused problems) user testing and complaints would have eliminated them (this said with hesitation) as unfortunate features have been known to survive) and lamented) e.g. ;orman)1?88).Atthispointthen)themostpromisingusesofanimationseemtobeto conveyrealCtime changes and reorientations in time andspace. 4. Implications

Giventheanalysisofthedifficultyofperceivingandconceptualizationanimations)the failurestofindbenefitsofanimationforconveyingcomplexsystemsbeyondequivalent staticdiagramsislessperplexing.Theapparentsuccessesturnedoutnottobesuccesses. 4nthosecases)theanimatedgraphicsinfactwerenotequivalenttothestaticgraphics) that is) in the animated graphics) more information was presented or the same information was presented differently) better) in the animated than in the static graphics. 4n other studies) animation was confounded with other factors known to

facilitatelearning)interactivityorpredictionoreventhepresenceofgraphics.4nsome of the most carefully controlled cases) the animations conveyed detailed information aboutthefinestructureoftheprocessesthatwasnotavailableinthestaticgraphics.4t maybethatsomekindsofinformationaremoreeasilyconveyedinanimationsthanin static diagrams) and that would be sufficient reason for using them. The information that might be more effectively portrayed in an animated graphic might include the qualitative aspects of motion or the microsteps) the exact sequence and timing of complex operations. Ahether

animations are more effective than static graphics for these subtle aspects ofchangeover time is unknown. This analysis suggests two principles specifying conditions for successful animated graphics) though these principles do not guarantee that animated graphics will be superiorto equivalent static ones. Congruence Principle : The structure and content of the external representation should correspond to the desired structure and content of the internal representation. 2or example) since routes are conceived of as a series of turns) an effective external visual representationof routes will

bebased onturns. A;4MAT49;:0A; 4T2A0484TAT/L 2D7
Page 12
Apprehension Principle :Thestructureandcontentoftheexternalrepresentationshouldbe readily and accurately perceived and comprehended. 2or example) since people represent anglesandlengthsingrosscategories)finerdistinctionsindiagramswillnotbeaccurately apprehended. 4n the case of routes) exact angles of turns and lengths of roads are not important. To accord with the 1rinciple of 0ongruence) there should be a natural correspondence between change over time) the core of animation) and the essential

conceptualinformationtobeconveyed.Thatconceptualinformationcouldbechange over time) for example movement or transformation or process. 4t could also be temporal sequence or causal flow. 4t could even be a natural order for attending to a complexarray(Betrancourt&Tversky)inpress).7omeofthesechangesandprocesses willbenaturallymorediscrete)somemorecontinuous.Toaccordwiththe1rincipleof Apprehension) animations must be slow and clear enough for observers to perceive movements) changes) and their timing) and to understand the changes in relations

betweenthepartsandthesequenceofevents.Thismeansthatanimationsshouldlean toward the schematic and away from the realistic) an inclination that does not come naturally to many programmers) who delight in graphic richness and realism. 4t also maymeanannotation)usingarrowsorhighlightingorotherdevicestodirectattention to the critical changes and relations. 7chematizing is simpler than it sounds6 clear understanding is a prerequisite to including only the information essential to the processes to be conveyed and eliminating extraneous but sometimes appealing information.

Accordingtothisanalysis)iftherearebenefitstoanimation)theyshouldbeevident especially for continuous rather than discrete changes) in particular) for manner of change and for microsteps) the subtle and intricate timing relations among parts of a complexsystem.=owever)evenforthesecases)cleverschematizationofstaticdiagrams may be just as effective as animation. 2or example) arrows are effective in indicating temporalsequenceanddirectionofmotion(e.g.Tversky)Jacks)8ee&=eiser) 2000). 4nteractivity may be the key to overcoming the drawbacks of animation as well as

enhancingitsadvantages.4flearnersareincontrol ofthespeedofanimationandcan viewandreview)stopandstart)zoominandout)andchangeorientationofpartsand wholes of the animation at will) then the problems of veridical perception can be alleviated.1articipantscanstudythoseaspectsoftheanimationthattheyneedwithout sufferingthroughportionstheyalreadyunderstand.Then)carefullycraftedanimations canbeapprehended)thosethathighlightthediscreteandhighClevelstepsandthosethat depict the analog and microsteps that animations seem wellCsuited to portray and convey. 8ike all good things) animation must be used with

care. 1reparation of the manuscript and part of the research reported here were aided by 9ffice of ;aval Research Grants ;umber ;99914C11C1C064? and ;999140110717 to 7tanford :niversity. References Baek )3.F.& Layne ) B. =. (1?88). 0olor) graphics) and animation in a computerCassisted learning tutorial lesson. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction 15, 1B11BD. B.T VERSKY ET AL. 2D8
Page 13
Betrancourt )M.& Tversky )B.(2000)./ffectsofcomputeranimationonusers$performance: a review. Le travail humain 63, B11B2?. Betrancourt )M.& Tversky ) B. (in press). 7imple animations for

organizing diagrams. International Journal of Human Computer Studies Bauer )M.4.& Johnson Laird ) 1. ;. (1??B). =ow diagrams can improve reasoning. Psychological Science 6, B72B78. Beniger )J.R.& Robyn ) H. 8. (1?78). Ouantitative graphics in statistics. The American Statistician 32, 111. Bower ) G. =.(1?70).Analysis of amnemonic device. American Scientist 58, 4?6D10. Byrne )M.H.) Catrambone )R.& Stasko )J.T.(1???)./valuatinganimationsasstudentaids in learning computer algorithms. Computers & Education 33, 2DB278. Caramazza ) A.) McCloskey )M.& Green ) B. (1?81). ;aive beliefs in

KKsophisticated$$ subjects: misconceptions about trajectories of objects. Cognition 9, 11712B. Card ) 7. F.) Mackinlay )J.H.& Shneiderman ) B. /ds. (1???). Readings in Information Visualization: Using Vision to Think . 7an2rancisco: Morgan Faufmann. Carswell ) 0.) Frankenberger )7.& Bernhard ) H. (1??1). Graphing in depth: perspectives ontheuse ofthreeCdimensional graphstorepresentlowerCdimensional data. Behaviour and Information Technology 10, 4D?474. Carswell )0.M.& Wickens ) 0. H. (1?88). Comparative graphics: history and applications of perceptual integrality theory and the proximity

compatibility hypothesis . Technical Report) 4nstitute ofAviation) :niversity of4llinois at:rbanaC0hampaign. ChanLin ) 8.CJ. (1??8). Animation to teach students of different knowledge levels. Journal of Instructional Psychology 25, 16617D. Coulmas ) 2. (1?8?). The Writing Systems of the World .9xford: Basil Blackwell. DeFrancis ) J. (1?8?). Visible Speech: The Diverse Oneness of Writing Systems . =onolulu: :niversity of =awaii 1ress. DeLoach )J.7.) Miller )F.2.& Rosengren )F.7.(1??7).Thecredibleshrinkingroom:Iery young children$s performance with symbolic and nonCsymbolic relations.

Psychological Science 8, B08B1B. Dwyer ) 2. M. (1?78). Strategies for Improving Visual Learning . 7tate 0ollege) 1A: 8earning 7ervices. Dyck ) J. 8. (1??D). 1roblem solving by novice Macintosh users: the effects of animated) selfC paced written) andno instruction. Journal of Educational Computing Research 12, 2?4?. Ferguson )/.8.& Hegarty )M.(1??D).8earningwithrealmachinesordiagrams:application of knowledge to realCworld problems. Cognition and Instruction 13, 12?160. Fontaine ) 7. (2001). 7patial cognition and the processing of verticality in underground environments. 4n H. Montello &M.

Hegarty ) /ds. Spatial Information Theory . Berlin: 7pringer. Freyd )J.J.& Jones ) F. T. (1??4). Representational momentum for a spiral path. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 20, ?68?76. Gattis )M.(2001).Readingpictures:constraintsonmappingconceptualandspatialschemas.4n M. Gattis )/d. Spatial Schemas in Abstract Thought )pp.22B24D.0ambridge:M4T1ress. Gattis )M.& Holyoak ) F. J. (1??6). Mapping conceptual to spatial relations in visual reasoning. Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning, Memory, and Cognition 22, 1?. Gelb ) 4. (1?6B). A Study of Writing

(2ndedn). 0hicago: :niversity of 0hicago 1ress. Gobert ) J. H. (1???). /xpertise in the comprehension of architectural plans. 4n J. Gero B. Tversky ) /ds. Visual and Spatial Reasoning in Design ) pp. 18D20D. 7ydney) Australia: Fey 0entre of Hesign 0omputing and 0ognition. Goodnow )J. (1?77). Children Drawing .0ambridge: =arvard :niversity1ress. Harley )J.B.& Woodward ) H. /ds. (1?87). The History of Cartography: Cartography in Prehistoric, Ancient and Medieval Europe and the Mediterranean )Iol.1.0hicago::niversity of 0hicago 1ress. Harley )J.B.& Woodward ) H. /ds. (1??2). The History of

Cartography: Cartography in the Traditional Islamic and South Asian Societies ) Iol. 2) Book 1. 0hicago: :niversity of 0hicago 1ress. A;4MAT49;:0A; 4T2A0484TAT/L 2D?
Page 14
Harrison ) 7. M. (1??D). A comparison of still) animated) or nonillustrated onCline help with written or spoken instructions in a graphical user interface. 4n 4. R. Katz )R. Mack 8. Marks )M.B. Rosson &J. Nielsen ) /ds. Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems ) pp. 828?. Henver) 09: A0M. Hegarty ) M. (1??2). Mental animation: 4nferring motion from static displays of mechanical

systems. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 18, 10841102. Hegarty ) M.) Narayanan );.=.& Freitas ) 1. (2002). :nderstanding machines from multimedia and hypermedia presentations. 4n J. Otero )J.A. Leon &A. Graesser /ds. The Psychology of Science Text Comprehension )pp.BD7B84. =illsdale);J:8awrence /rlbaum. Hegarty )M.) Quilici )J.) Narayanan );.=.) Holmquist )7.& Moreno )R.(1???).Hesigning multimediamanualsthatexplainhowmachineswork:8essonsfromevaluationofatheoryC based design. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia 8, 11?1D0. Hughes ) M. (1?86).

Children and Number: Difficulties in Learning Mathematics . 9xford: Blackwell. Kaiser )M.F.) Pro,,itt )H.R.) Whelan )7.M.& Hecht )=.(1??2).4nfluenceofanimationon dynamical judgments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 18, 66?6?0. Kellogg ) R.(1?6?). Analyzing Childrens Art . 1aloAlto) 0A: ;ational 1ress. Kieras ) H. /. (1??2). Hiagrammatic displays for engineered systems: effects on human performance in interacting with malfunctioning systems. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 36, 8618?D. Large ) A.) Beheshti ) J.) Breuleux )A.&

Renaud ) A. (1??6). The effect of animation in enhancingdescriptiveandproceduraltextsinamultimedialearningenvironment. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 47, 4B7448. Larkin )J.=.& Simon )=.A.(1?87).Ahyadiagramis(sometimes)worthtenthousandwords. Cognitive Science 11, 6D??. Levie )A.=.& Lentz )R.(1?82)./ffectsoftextillustrations:areviewofresearch. Educational Communication and Technology 30, 1?D2B2. Levin )J.R.& Lesgold ) A. M. (1?78). 9n pictures in prose. Educational Communication and Technology 26, 2BB24B. Levin )J.R.& Mayer ) R. /. (1??B). :nderstanding illustrations

in text. 4n B. F. Britton A. Woodward &M. Binkley, /ds. Learning from Textbooks: Theory and Practice pp. ?D11?. =illsdale) ;J: /rlbaum. Levy ) /.) Zacks ) J.) Tversky )B.& Schiano ) H. (1??6). Gratuitous graphics: 1utting preferences in perspective. Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems )pp. 424?. ;ew 3ork: A0M. Liben ) 8. 7. (1???). Heveloping an understanding of external spatial representations. 4n 4. /. Sigel ) /d. Development of Mental Representation pp. 2?7B21. Mahwah) ;J: /rlbaum Associates. Lowe ) R. (1???). /xtracting information from an animation

during complex visual processing. European Journal of the Psychology of Education 14, 22D244. Mallery ) G. (18?B/1?72). Picture Writing of the American Indians (9riginally published by Government 1rinting 9ffice). ;ew3ork: Hover. Mandl )A.& Levin )J./ds.(1?8?). Knowledge Acquisition from Text and Pictures .Amsterdam: ;orthC=olland. Mayer ) R. /. (1?8?). 7ystematic thinking fostered by illustrations in scientific text. Journal of Educational Psychology 81, 24046. McCloskey ) M. (1?8B ).4ntuitive physics. Scientific American 248, 1221B0. McCloskey ) M. (1?8B ). ;aive

theories of motion. 4n H. Gentner &A.8. Stevens, /ds. Mental Models )pp. 2??B24. =illsdale) ;J: /rlbaum. Morrison )J.B.& Tversky ) B. (2001). The (in)effectiveness of animation in instruction. 4n J. Jacko &A. Sears )/ds. Extended Abstracts of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems )pp. B77B78. 7eattle: A0M. B.T VERSKY ET AL. 260
Page 15
Nathan ) M. J.) Kintsch )A.& Young ) /. (1??2). A theory of algebraCwordCproblem comprehension and its implications for the design of learning environments. Cognition and Instruction 9, B2?B8?. Norman ) H.A. (1?88). The psychology

of Everyday Things .;3: Basic Books. Palmiter )7.& Elkerton ) J. (1??B). Animated demonstrations for learning procedural computerCbased tasks. HumanComputer Interaction 8, 1?B216. Palmiter ) 7. 8.) Elkerton )J.& Baggett ) 1. (1??1). Animated demonstrations vs. written instructionsforlearningproceduraltasks:apreliminaryinvestigation. International Journal of ManMachine Studies 34, 687701. Pane ) J. 2.) Corbett )A.T.& John ) B. /. (1??6). Assessing dynamics in computerCbased instruction.4nM.J. Tauber )/d. Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems )pp. 7?7804.

Iancouver: A0M. Pani ) J. R.) Je,,res ) J. A.) Shippey )G.T.& Schwartz ) F. T. (1??6). 4magining projective transformations: Aligned orientations in spatial organization. Cognitive Psychology 31, 12D167. Park ) 9.C0. & Gittelman ) 7. 7. (1??2). 7elective use of animation and feedback in computerC based instruction. Educational Technology, Research, and Development 40, 27B8. Payne ) 7. J.) Chesworth )8.& Hill ) /. (1??2). Animated demonstrations for exploratory learners. Interacting with Computers 4, B22. Perez )/.0.& White )M.A.(1?8D).7tudentevaluationofmotivationalandlearningattributes of

microcomputer software. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction 12, B?4B. Rieber ) 8. 1. (1?8?). The effects of computer animated elaboration strategies and practice on factual and application learning in an elementary science lesson. Journal of Educational Computing Research 5, 4B1444. Rieber )8.1.(1??0).:singcomputeranimatedgraphicswithscienceinstructionwithchildren. Journal of Educational Psychology 82, 1BD140. Rieber ) 8. 1. (1??1 ). Animation) incidental learning) and continuing motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology 83, B18B28. Rieber )8. 1.(1??1

)./ffectsofvisualgroupingstrategiesofcomputerCanimatedpresentations on selective attention in science. Educational Technology, Research, and Development 39, D1D. Rieber ) 8. 1.) Boyce )M.J.& Assad ) 0. (1??0). The effects of computer animation on adult learning andretrieval tasks. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction 17, 46D2. Rieber )8.1.& Hanna,in )M.J.(1?88)./ffectsoftextualandanimatedorientingactivitiesand practice on learning from computerCbased instruction. Computers in the Schools 5, 778?. Scai,e )M.& Rogers ) 3. (1??6). /xternal cognition: how do graphical representations workL

International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 45, 18D21B. Schmandt Besserat ) H. (1??2). Before Writing: From Counting to Cuneiform ) Iol. 1. Austin: :niversity of Texas1ress. Schnotz )A.& Grzondziel ) =. (1???). 4ndividual and coCoperative learning with interactive animated pictures. European Journal of Psychology of Education 14, 24D26D. Schnotz )A.& Kulhavy ) R.A. (1??4). Comprehension of Graphics . Amsterdam: /lsevier. Schwartz )H.8.(1???).1hysicalimagery:kinematicvs.dynamicmodels. Cognitive Psychology 38, 4BB464. Schwartz )H.8.& Black )J.B.(1??6).Analog

imageryinmentalmodelreasoning:depictive models. Cognitive Psychology 30, 1D421?. Shi,,rar )M.M.& Shepard )R.;.(1??1).0omparisonofcuberotationsaroundaxesinclined relative to the environment or to the cube. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 17, 44D4 Sirikasem )1.& Shebilske ) A. 8. (1??1). The perception and metaperception of architectural designs communicated by videoCcomputer imaging. Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung 53, 11B126. Slocum ) T. A.) Yoder ) 7. 0.) Kessler )2.0.& Sluter ) R. 7. (2000). MapTime: software for exploring

spatiotemporal data associated with point locations. Cartographica 57, 1DB1. A;4MAT49;:0A; 4T2A0484TAT/L 261
Page 16
Small ) J. 1. (1??7). Wax Tablets of the Mind: Cognitive Studies of Memory and Literacy in Classical Antiquity . ;ew 3ork: Routledge. Spence )4.& Lewandowsky ) 7. (1??1). Hisplaying proportions and percentages. Applied Cognitive Psychology 5, 6177. Tan )H.7.) Robertson )G.G.& Czerwinski )M.(2001)./xploringBHnavigation:combining speedCcoupled flying with orbiting. 4n J. Jacko )A. Sears )M. Beaudouin La,on )& R. J. F. Jacob, /ds. Proceedings of the ACM Conference

on Human Factors in Computing Systems )pp. 418424. 7eattle: A0M. Taylor )=.A.& Tversky ) B. (1??2). 7patial mental models derived from survey and route descriptions. Journal of Memory and Language 31, 2612?2 Tessler ) 7.) Iwasaki )3.& Kincho Law ) F. (1??D). Oualitative structural analysis using diagrammaticreasoning.4nJ. Glasgow );.=. Narayanan &G. Chandrasekeran )/ds. Diagrammatic Reasoning: Cognitive and Computational Perspectives ) pp. 7117B0. 0ambridge: M4T 1ress. Thompson )7.I.& Riding )R.J.(1??0).Theeffectofanimateddiagramsontheunderstanding

ofamathematicaldemonstrationin11Cto14CyearColdpupils. British Journal of Educational Psychology 60, ?B?8. Tolchinsky Landsmann )8.& Levin )4.(1?87).AritinginfourCtosixCyearColds:representation of semantic and phonetic similarities and differences. Journal of Child Language 14, 127144. Tu,te ) /. R. (1?8B). The Visual Display of Quantitative Information . 0heshire) 0T: Graphics 1ress. Tversky ) B. (1??D). 0ognitive origins of conventions. 4n 2. T. Marchese ) /d. Understanding Images ) pp. 2?DB. ;ew 3ork: 7pringerCIerlag. Tversky ) B. (2001). 7patial schemas in depictions. 4n M. Gattis ) /d.

Spatial Schemas and Abstract Thought )pp. 7?C111. 0ambridge: M4T 1ress. Tversky )B.) Kugelmass )7.& Winter )A.(1??1).0rossCculturalanddevelopmentaltrendsin graphic productions. Cognitive Psychology 23, D1DDD7. Tversky )B) Zacks ) J.) Lee )1.:.& Heiser ) J. (2000). 8ines) blobs) crosses) and arrows: Hiagrammatic communication with schematic figures. 4n M. Anderson )1. Cheng )& I. Haarslev ) /ds. Theory and Application of Diagrams ) pp. 2212B0. Berlin: 7pringer. Winn )A.(1?87).0harts)graphs)anddiagramsineducationalmaterials.4nH.M. Willows =. A. Houghton ) /ds. The Psychology of

Illustrations, Iol. 1) pp. 1D21?8. ;ew 3ork: 7pringerCIerlag. Winn ) A. (1?8?). The design and use of instructional graphics. 4n =. Mandl &J.R. Levin /ds. Knowledge Acquisition from Text and Pictures ) pp. 12D144. Amsterdam: ;orth =olland. Wood )H. (1??2). The Power of Maps . ;3: Guilford. Woodward )H.& Lewis ) G. M. (1??4). The History of Cartography: Cartography in the Traditional East and Southeast Asian Societies ) Iol. 2) Book 2. 0hicago: :niversity of 0hicago 1ress. Yates ) 2. A.(1?6?). The Art of Memory . ;ew3ork: 1enguin. Zacks )J.) Levy )/.) Tversky )B.& Schiano

)H.J.(1??8).Readingbargraphs:effectsofdepth cues andgraphical context. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 4, 11?1B8. Zacks ) J.) Tversky )B.& Iyer ) G. (2001). 1erceiving) remembering) and communicating structure in events. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 130, 2?D8. B.T VERSKY ET AL. 262