Graph schema and best graph type to compare discrete groups: Bar, line, and pie
Different graph types may differ in their suitability to support group comparisons, due to the underlying graph schemas. This study examined whether graph schemas are based on perceptual features (i.e., each graph type, e.g., bar or line graph, has its own graph schema) or common invariant structure...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2022-12-01
|
| Series: | Frontiers in Psychology |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.991420/full |
| _version_ | 1811196452639080448 |
|---|---|
| author | Fang Zhao Robert Gaschler |
| author_facet | Fang Zhao Robert Gaschler |
| author_sort | Fang Zhao |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Different graph types may differ in their suitability to support group comparisons, due to the underlying graph schemas. This study examined whether graph schemas are based on perceptual features (i.e., each graph type, e.g., bar or line graph, has its own graph schema) or common invariant structures (i.e., graph types share common schemas). Furthermore, it was of interest which graph type (bar, line, or pie) is optimal for comparing discrete groups. A switching paradigm was used in three experiments. Two graph types were examined at a time (Experiment 1: bar vs. line, Experiment 2: bar vs. pie, Experiment 3: line vs. pie). On each trial, participants received a data graph presenting the data from three groups and were to determine the numerical difference of group A and group B displayed in the graph. We scrutinized whether switching the type of graph from one trial to the next prolonged RTs. The slowing of RTs in switch trials in comparison to trials with only one graph type can indicate to what extent the graph schemas differ. As switch costs were observed in all pairings of graph types, none of the different pairs of graph types tested seems to fully share a common schema. Interestingly, there was tentative evidence for differences in switch costs among different pairings of graph types. Smaller switch costs in Experiment 1 suggested that the graph schemas of bar and line graphs overlap more strongly than those of bar graphs and pie graphs or line graphs and pie graphs. This implies that results were not in line with completely distinct schemas for different graph types either. Taken together, the pattern of results is consistent with a hierarchical view according to which a graph schema consists of parts shared for different graphs and parts that are specific for each graph type. Apart from investigating graph schemas, the study provided evidence for performance differences among graph types. We found that bar graphs yielded the fastest group comparisons compared to line graphs and pie graphs, suggesting that they are the most suitable when used to compare discrete groups. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-12T00:59:08Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-8ab1636c6300401d812ce99b070eeae7 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1664-1078 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-12T00:59:08Z |
| publishDate | 2022-12-01 |
| publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Frontiers in Psychology |
| spelling | doaj.art-8ab1636c6300401d812ce99b070eeae72022-12-22T03:54:31ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Psychology1664-10782022-12-011310.3389/fpsyg.2022.991420991420Graph schema and best graph type to compare discrete groups: Bar, line, and pieFang Zhao0Robert Gaschler1Center of Advanced Technology for Assisted Learning and Predictive Analytics, FernUniversität in Hagen, Hagen, GermanyDepartment of Psychology, FernUniversität in Hagen, Hagen, GermanyDifferent graph types may differ in their suitability to support group comparisons, due to the underlying graph schemas. This study examined whether graph schemas are based on perceptual features (i.e., each graph type, e.g., bar or line graph, has its own graph schema) or common invariant structures (i.e., graph types share common schemas). Furthermore, it was of interest which graph type (bar, line, or pie) is optimal for comparing discrete groups. A switching paradigm was used in three experiments. Two graph types were examined at a time (Experiment 1: bar vs. line, Experiment 2: bar vs. pie, Experiment 3: line vs. pie). On each trial, participants received a data graph presenting the data from three groups and were to determine the numerical difference of group A and group B displayed in the graph. We scrutinized whether switching the type of graph from one trial to the next prolonged RTs. The slowing of RTs in switch trials in comparison to trials with only one graph type can indicate to what extent the graph schemas differ. As switch costs were observed in all pairings of graph types, none of the different pairs of graph types tested seems to fully share a common schema. Interestingly, there was tentative evidence for differences in switch costs among different pairings of graph types. Smaller switch costs in Experiment 1 suggested that the graph schemas of bar and line graphs overlap more strongly than those of bar graphs and pie graphs or line graphs and pie graphs. This implies that results were not in line with completely distinct schemas for different graph types either. Taken together, the pattern of results is consistent with a hierarchical view according to which a graph schema consists of parts shared for different graphs and parts that are specific for each graph type. Apart from investigating graph schemas, the study provided evidence for performance differences among graph types. We found that bar graphs yielded the fastest group comparisons compared to line graphs and pie graphs, suggesting that they are the most suitable when used to compare discrete groups.https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.991420/fullgraph comprehensiongroup comparisongraph schemamixing-costs paradigmhierarchical structure |
| spellingShingle | Fang Zhao Robert Gaschler Graph schema and best graph type to compare discrete groups: Bar, line, and pie Frontiers in Psychology graph comprehension group comparison graph schema mixing-costs paradigm hierarchical structure |
| title | Graph schema and best graph type to compare discrete groups: Bar, line, and pie |
| title_full | Graph schema and best graph type to compare discrete groups: Bar, line, and pie |
| title_fullStr | Graph schema and best graph type to compare discrete groups: Bar, line, and pie |
| title_full_unstemmed | Graph schema and best graph type to compare discrete groups: Bar, line, and pie |
| title_short | Graph schema and best graph type to compare discrete groups: Bar, line, and pie |
| title_sort | graph schema and best graph type to compare discrete groups bar line and pie |
| topic | graph comprehension group comparison graph schema mixing-costs paradigm hierarchical structure |
| url | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.991420/full |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT fangzhao graphschemaandbestgraphtypetocomparediscretegroupsbarlineandpie AT robertgaschler graphschemaandbestgraphtypetocomparediscretegroupsbarlineandpie |