Object Displays Do Not Always Support Better Integrated Task Performance
- 1 April 1989
- journal article
- research article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society
- Vol. 31 (2) , 183-198
- https://doi.org/10.1177/001872088903100207
Abstract
This study examines Wickens' compatibility of proximity hypothesis of visual display design and proposes that an emergent-features approach might carry more explanatory power. Two studies show that a bar graph display is superior to an object display in an integration task if the bar graph has a strong emergent feature that maps directly onto a goal-relevant task invariant. Earlier results by Wickens and colleagues showing an object display advantage could not be replicated or generalized. These new findings suggest that object display advantages occur only under limited conditions and that the exploitation of emergent features may more predictably lead to an advantage of one display over another.Keywords
This publication has 9 references indexed in Scilit:
- The Bargraph as a Configural and a Separable DisplayProceedings of the Human Factors Society Annual Meeting, 1988
- Display Proximity in Multicue Information Integration: The Benefits of BoxesHuman Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 1988
- Information integration and the object display An interaction of task demands and display superiorityErgonomics, 1987
- Display Format and the Perception of Numerical DataProceedings of the Human Factors Society Annual Meeting, 1986
- Visual Form Perception: An OverviewPublished by Elsevier ,1986
- Emergent features, attention, and object perception.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1984
- On the possibility of “smart” perceptual mechanismsScandinavian Journal of Psychology, 1977
- Perception of wholes and of their component parts: Some configural superiority effects.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1977
- The stimulus in information processing.American Psychologist, 1970