Readers' judgment explanations support a cautious hierarchy of perceptual cues: content, then color, then space, then graphic features¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2016 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Content was the most-mentioned judgment feature when available (77–93% of judgments), and color was the most important cue when text was absent (84–87%). → Marije van Amelsvoort 2016 q2 i? Space features were mentioned slightly more often than graphic features, with direction at 25.7% and arrows at 10.5% versus boxes at 4.4%. → Marije van Amelsvoort 2016 (2)

Evidence¶

Marije van Amelsvoort 2016¶

Marije van Amelsvoort, Alfons Maes. (2016). Show me your opinion. Perceptual cues in creating and reading argument diagrams. Instructional Science 44:335–357. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-016-9378-9

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Analysis of 1497 transcribed judgment explanations from the unlimited-time task in the perception study. Content was mentioned in 77–93% of judgments where text was available, but was the sole basis in only 14.6% of explanations.

"Table 6 shows that when participants had text available, it was by far the most important feature they based their judgments on, mentioned in 77–93 % of all judgments. Yet, only in 14.6 % of all explanations, content was mentioned as the only feature participants based their judgment on."

Marije van Amelsvoort 2016 (2)¶

Marije van Amelsvoort, Alfons Maes. (2016). Show me your opinion. Perceptual cues in creating and reading argument diagrams. Instructional Science 44:335–357. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-016-9378-9

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Proportions of feature mentions across all judgment explanations: direction 25.7% (n = 386), position 13.8% (n = 207), arrows 10.5% (n = 157), boxes 4.4% (n = 66). These are descriptive proportions, not effect sizes.

"As to the role of space, the temporal order of information based on space ('direction') is mentioned in 25.7 % of all cases (n = 386), while position was highlighted in 13.8 % (n = 207). As to graphic elements, arrows were mentioned twice as much as boxes in the explanations (arrows: 10.5 %; n = 157; boxes: 4.4 %; n = 66)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Color, especially green for arguments in favor and red for arguments against, is widely used by producers to categorize for and against arguments — related
• Readers judge a diagram's argumentative position above chance in all conditions except when both text and color are absent, and deleting graphics is more detrimental than deleting text — related
• Self-assessments of diagram boxes are more accurate than comprehension judgments and strongly correlated with them in the diagramming paradigm — related
• No credible spacing or color cue effects on the BKT learning rate were observed in the perceptual-cue reanalysis — related
• In a perceptual-cue intervention reanalysis, incongruent spacing and incongruent color conditions were associated with reduced guessing relative to neutral conditions — related