An official website of the United States government
Abstract How do drawings—ranging from detailed illustrations to schematic diagrams—reliably convey meaning? Do viewers understand drawings based on how strongly they resemble an entity (i.e., as images) or based on socially mediated conventions (i.e., as symbols)? Here we evaluate a cognitive account of pictorial meaning in which visual and social information jointly support visual communication. Pairs of participants used drawings to repeatedly communicate the identity of a target object among multiple distractor objects. We manipulated social cues across three experiments and a full replication, finding that participants developed object-specific and interaction-specific strategies for communicating more efficiently over time, beyond what task practice or a resemblance-based account alone could explain. Leveraging model-based image analyses and crowdsourced annotations, we further determined that drawings did not drift toward “arbitrariness,” as predicted by a pure convention-based account, but preserved visually diagnostic features. Taken together, these findings advance psychological theories of how successful graphical conventions emerge.
more »
« less
Visual Validation versus Visual Estimation: A Study on the Average Value in Scatterplots
We investigate the ability of individuals to visually validate statistical models in terms of their fit to the data. While visual model estimation has been studied extensively, visual model validation remains under-investigated. It is unknown how well people are able to visually validate models, and how their performance compares to visual and computational estimation. As a starting point, we conducted a study across two populations (crowdsourced and volunteers). Participants had to both visually estimate (i.e, draw) and visually validate (i.e., accept or reject) the frequently studied model of averages. Across both populations, the level of accuracy of the models that were considered valid was lower than the accuracy of the estimated models. We find that participants' validation and estimation were unbiased. Moreover, their natural critical point between accepting and rejecting a given mean value is close to the boundary of its 95\% confidence interval, indicating that the visually perceived confidence interval corresponds to a common statistical standard. Our work contributes to the understanding of visual model validation and opens new research opportunities.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2007436
- PAR ID:
- 10465556
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- IEEE Visualization Conference Short Papers
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Introduction:The current work probes the effectiveness of multimodal touch screen tablet electronic devices in conveying science, technology, engineering, and mathematics graphics via vibrations and sounds to individuals who are visually impaired (i.e., blind or low vision) and compares it with similar graphics presented in an embossed format. Method:A volunteer sample of 22 participants who are visually impaired, selected from a summer camp and local schools for blind students, were recruited for the current study. Participants were first briefly (∼30 min) trained on how to explore graphics via a multimodal touch screen tablet. They then explored six graphic types (number line, table, pie chart, bar chart, line graph, and map) displayed via embossed paper and tablet. Participants answered three content questions per graphic type following exploration. Results:Participants were only 6% more accurate when answering questions regarding an embossed graphic as opposed to a tablet graphic. A paired-samples t test indicated that this difference was not significant, t(14) = 1.91, p = .07. Follow-up analyses indicated that presentation medium did not interact with graphic type, F(5, 50) = 0.43, p = .83, nor visual ability, F(1, 13) = 0.00, p = .96. Discussion:The findings demonstrate that multimodal touch screen tablets may be comparable to embossed graphics in conveying iconographic science and mathematics content to individuals with visual impairments, regardless of the severity of impairment. The relative equivalence in response accuracy between mediums was unexpected, given that most students who participated were braille readers and had experience reading embossed graphics, whereas they were introduced to the tablet the day of testing. Implications for practitioners:This work illustrates that multimodal touch screen tablets may be an effective option for general education teachers or teachers of students with visual impairments to use in their educational practices. Currently, preparation of accessible graphics is time consuming and requires significant preparation, but such tablets provide solutions for offering “real-time” displays of these graphics for presentation in class.more » « less
-
Attention and emotion are fundamental psychological systems. It is well established that emotion intensifies attention. Three experiments reported here ( N = 235) demonstrated the reversed causal direction: Voluntary visual attention intensifies perceived emotion. In Experiment 1, participants repeatedly directed attention toward a target object during sequential search. Participants subsequently perceived their emotional reactions to target objects as more intense than their reactions to control objects. Experiments 2 and 3 used a spatial-cuing procedure to manipulate voluntary visual attention. Spatially cued attention increased perceived emotional intensity. Participants perceived spatially cued objects as more emotionally intense than noncued objects even when participants were asked to mentally rehearse the name of noncued objects. This suggests that the intensifying effect of attention is independent of more extensive mental rehearsal. Across experiments, attended objects were perceived as more visually distinctive, which statistically mediated the effects of attention on emotional intensity.more » « less
-
In the language development literature, studies often make inferences about infants’ speech perception abilities based on their responses to a single speaker. However, there can be significant natural variability across speakers in how speech is produced (i.e., inter-speaker differences). The current study examined whether inter-speaker differences can affect infants’ ability to detect a mismatch between the auditory and visual components of vowels. Using an eye-tracker, 4.5-month-old infants were tested on auditory-visual (AV) matching for two vowels (/i/ and /u/). Critically, infants were tested with two speakers who naturally differed in how distinctively they articulated the two vowels within and across the categories. Only infants who watched and listened to the speaker whose visual articulations of the two vowels were most distinct from one another were sensitive to AV mismatch. This speaker also produced a visually more distinct /i/ as compared to the other speaker. This finding suggests that infants are sensitive to the distinctiveness of AV information across speakers, and that when making inferences about infants’ perceptual abilities, characteristics of the speaker should be taken into account.more » « less
-
For the task of image classification, researchers work arduously to develop the next state-of-the-art (SOTA) model, each bench-marking their own performance against that of their predecessors and of their peers. Unfortunately, the metric used most frequently to describe a model’s performance, average categorization accuracy, is often used in isolation. As the number of classes increases, such as in fine-grained visual categorization (FGVC), the amount of information conveyed by average accuracy alone dwindles. While its most glaring weakness is its failure to describe the model’s performance on a class-by-class basis, average accuracy also fails to describe how performance may vary from one trained model of the same architecture, on the same dataset, to another (both averaged across all categories and at the per-class level). We first demonstrate the magnitude of these variations across models and across class distributions based on attributes of the data, comparing results on different visual domains and different per-class image distributions, including long-tailed distributions and few-shot subsets. We then analyze the impact various FGVC methods have on overall and per-class variance. From this analysis, we both highlight the importance of reporting and comparing methods based on information beyond overall accuracy, as well as point out techniques that mitigate variance in FGVC results.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- The DOI is not currently available.
