Search for: All records

in press 

While visualization can support understanding complex phenomena, their effectiveness might vary with the recipient’s familiarity with both the phenomenon and the visualization. The current study contrasted interpretations of simulated hurricane paths using student populations from a high frequency hurricane area versus no local hurricane risk. Non-expert understanding of trajectory predictions was supported via two visualizations: common cones of uncertainty and novel dynamic ensembles. General patterns of performance were similar across the two groups. Participants from the high hurricane risk area did show narrower decision thresholds, in both common and novel visualization formats. More variability was consistently considered possible when viewing the dynamic ensemble displays. Despite greater likelihood of experiences with variability of trajectories outside of forecast paths, greater familiarity tended towards narrower interpretations of the need for evacuations within the variability possible. The results suggest an advantage of dynamic ensembles in grasping uncertainty even in populations familiar with hurricanes. 

Visual perception is not always veridical but can be influenced by factors such as ease of acting, energetic cost, and even body type of the observer. This notion is called action-specific perception. Several effects of action capability on visual perception have been found, but there is much controversy as to whether these effects are truly perceptual. Because perception cannot be measured directly, resolving the controversy relies on ruling out alternative explanations through systematic testing. We combined one of the most robust action-specific effects (the Pong effect) with one of the primary suggestions for exploring an alternative explanation, namely whether the effect persists across instructions that emphasize different aspects of the task. The Pong effect was robust to the type of instructions. The results provide critical evidence that the Pong effect is truly perceptual, furthering the argument that a person’s ability to act can influence visual perception. 

Abstract The gun embodiment effect is the consequence caused by wielding a gun on judgments of whether others are also holding a gun. This effect could be responsible for real-world instances when police officers shoot an unarmed person because of the misperception that the person had a gun. The gun embodiment effect is an instance of embodied cognition for which a person’s tool-augmented body affects their judgments. The replication crisis in psychology has raised concern about embodied cognition effects in particular, and the issue of low statistical power applies to the original research on the gun embodiment effect.Thus, the first step was to conduct a high-powered replication. We found a significant gun embodiment effect in participants’ reaction times and in their proportion of correct responses, but not in signal detection measures of bias, as had been originally reported. To help prevent the gun embodiment effect from leading to fatal encounters, it would be useful to know whether individuals with certain traits are less prone to the effect and whether certain kinds of experiences help alleviate the effect. With the new and reliable measure of the gun embodiment effect, we tested for moderation by individual differences related to prior gun experience, attitudes, personality, and factors related to emotion regulation and impulsivity. Despite the variety of these measures, there was little evidence for moderation. The results were more consistent with the idea of the gun embodiment effect being a universal, fixed effect, than being a flexible, malleable effect. 

Visualizations attempt to convey the uncertain track of an approaching hurricane. The current experiment contrasted decision characteristics that resulted from observing hurricane paths presented using cones of uncertainty versus a new form of dynamic ensemble. Participants made judgments about whether to evacuate a town at different eccentricities to the central predicted path of a storm. Results showed that dynamic ensembles have different properties to cone displays. Presentations of dynamic ensembles encouraged greater consideration of evacuation at locations further from the most probable path, but that were still at risk. However, dynamic ensembles resulted in lower evacuation rates at the center of the distribution, consistent with a probabilistic sense of the risk but nonetheless a potentially undesirable strategy. In addition, perceptions of the evacuation need with dynamic ensemble presentations were more strongly influenced by the amount of variability than with cones. The implications for use of dynamic ensembles are discussed.