Graphs for Research in Counseling Psychology

Wilkinson, Leland

doi:10.1177/0011000099273005

Cited by 21 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In general, pie charts are more accurate for making part/whole judgments than divided bar graphs are because divided bar graphs often require adding up information from different parts of the bar (Simkin and Hastie, 1986). Thus, pie charts are generally preferred over divided bar charts when the goal is for viewers to comprehend relative proportions (Kosslyn, 1994;Wilkinson, 1999). However, divided bar charts may be better when absolute values as well as proportions are important to communicate (Kosslyn, 1994).…”

Section: (B)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Untitled

Shah

Hoeffner

2002

Educational Psychology Review

317

140

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Graphs are commonly used in textbooks and educational software, and can help students understand science and social science data. However, students sometimes have difficulty comprehending information depicted in graphs. What makes a graph better or worse at communicating relevant quantitative information? How can students learn to interpret graphs more effectively? This article reviews the cognitive literature on how viewers comprehend graphs and the factors that influence viewers' interpretations. Three major factors are considered: the visual characteristics of a graph (e.g., format, animation, color, use of legend, size, etc.), a viewer's knowledge about graphs, and a viewer's knowledge and expectations about the content of the data in a graph. This article provides a set of guidelines for the presentation of graphs to students and considers the implications of graph comprehension research for the teaching of graphical literacy skills. Finally, this article discusses unresolved questions and directions for future research relevant to data presentation and the teaching of graphical literacy skills.

show abstract

Section: (B)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Untitled

Shah

Hoeffner

2002

Educational Psychology Review

317

140

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although competence in statistical methods still remains more widespread than graphical competence, recent developments point to a revival of "graphicacy," construed as a set of crucial graphical skills analogous to literacy or numeracy (Wainer, 1980; see review in Wainer & Velleman, 2000). These developments also show that the evolving technologies of graphing are no less at home in soft-science domains than in laboratory settings (Wainer, 1997;Wilkinson, 1999). Modern graphing techniques exist for data of all levels of measurement, sample size, and dimensionality, ranging from simple univariate measures to complex multivariate data.…”

Section: Graphism For All?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Constructing knowledge: The role of graphs and tables in hard and soft psychology.

Smith¹,

Best²,

Stubbs³

et al. 2002

American Psychologist

114

111

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Because graphs provide a compact, rhetorically powerful way of representing research findings, recent theories of science have postulated their use as a distinguishing feature of science. Studies have shown that the use of graphs in journal articles correlates highly with the hardness of scientific fields, both across disciplines and across sub-fields of psychology. In contrast, the use of tables and inferential statistics in psychology is inversely related to subfield hardness, suggesting that the relationship between hardness and graph use is not attributable to differences in the use of quantitative data in subfields or their commitment to empiricism. Enhanced "graphicacy" among psychologists could contribute to the progress of psychological science by providing alternatives to significance testing and by facilitating communication across subfields.

show abstract

“…Line graphs were found best in displaying x-y trends (Carswell, Emery, & Lonon, 1993;Shan, Mayer, & Hegarty, 1999) and supporting globalintegration processing (Carswell, 1990;Hollands & Spence, 1992). On the other hand, pie graphs are good for depicting relative proportions of the data (Simkin & Hastie, 1987;Wilkinson, 1999). Line and pie graphs were thus selected in the development of source graphs in attempts to elicit global comparisons of two graphs rather than mere descriptions of x-and y-axis and data point values.…”

Section: Tasksmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparative study of composing processes in reading- and graph-based writing tasks

Yang

2012

Language Testing in Asia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study compares EFL writers' processes in composing readingbased writing (RW) and graph-based writing (GW) tasks developed for a university English proficiency exam. Think-aloud protocols and interviews of ten university-level nonnative English-speaking writers were collected to explore writers' composing processes. The results revealed that both types of the tasks require global comprehension of source texts as well as integrative manipulation of available information for writing. Some differences, however, existed across tasks and writers of varying score levels, with the RW tasks eliciting a more interactive and facilitative process than the GW tasks for the higher scoring writers. These results suggested that these tasks might measure different aspects of academic writing ability. Several considerations of the task constructs should apply in properly determining their use in a language test. The findings could be used to provide insights into the nature of RW and GW tasks and contribute to the validity of source-based writing tasks.

show abstract

Graphs for Research in Counseling Psychology

Cited by 21 publications

References 27 publications

Untitled

Untitled

Constructing knowledge: The role of graphs and tables in hard and soft psychology.

A comparative study of composing processes in reading- and graph-based writing tasks

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About