George E. Newman and Brian J. Scholl.
Bar Graphs Depicting Averages are Perceptually Misinterpreted: The Within-the-Bar Bias.
In Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 6014--607, 2012.


Links:

Abstract:

Perhaps the most common method of depicting data, in both scientific communication and popular media, is the bar graph. Bar graphs often depict measures of central tendency, but they do so asymmetrically: A mean, for example, is depicted not by a point, but by the edge of a bar that originates from a single axis. Here we show that this graphical asymmetry gives rise to a corresponding cognitive asymmetry. When viewers are shown a bar depicting a mean value and are then asked to judge the likelihood of a particular data point being part of its underlying distribution, viewers judge points that fall within the bar as being more likely than points equidistant from the mean, but outside the bar-as if the bar somehow "contained" the relevant data. This "within-the-bar bias" occurred (a) for graphs with and without error bars, (b) for bars that originated from both lower and upper axes, (c) for test points with equally extreme numeric labels, (d) both from memory (when the bar was no longer visible) and in online perception (while the bar was visible during the judgment), (e) both within and between subjects, and (f) in populations including college students, adults from the broader community, and online samples. We posit that this bias may arise due to principles of object perception, and we show how it has downstream implications for decision making.

Bibtex:

@Article{        newman:2012:WTBB,
  author = 	 {George E. Newman and Brian J. Scholl},
  title = 	 {Bar Graphs Depicting Averages are Perceptually Misinterpreted: The Within-the-Bar Bias},
  journal = 	 {Psychonomic Bulletin \& Review},
  year = 	 {2012},
    volume = 	 {19},
  number = 	 {4},
  pages = 	 {6014--607},
  month = 	 {August},
}

Images:

References:

Chabris, C. F., & Kosslyn, S. M. (2005). Representational correspondence as a basic principle of diagram design. In S.-O. Tergan & T.
Keller (Eds.), Knowledge and information visualization: Searching for synergies (pp. 36-57). Berlin: Springer.
Chua, H. F., Yates, J. F., & Shah, P. (2006). Risk avoidance: Graphs versus numbers. Memory & Cognition, 34, 399-410. doi:10.3758/BF03193417
Egly, R., Driver, J., & Rafal, R. (1994). Shifting visual attention between objects and locations: Evidence from normal and parietal lesion subjects. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General, 123, 161-177. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.123.2.161
Fischer, M. H. (2000). Do irrelevant depth cues affect the comprehension of bar graphs? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 14, 151-162.
Gigerenzer, G., Swijtink, Z., Porter, T., Daston, L., Beatty, J., & Krüger, L. (1989). The empire of chance: How probability changed science and everyday life. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
Gillan, D. J., & Richman, E. H. (1994). Miminalism and the syntax of graphs. Human Factors, 36, 619-644.
Kimchi, R., Yeshurun, Y., & Cohen-Savransky, A. (2007). Automatic, stimulus-driven attentional capture by objecthood. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 166-172. doi:10.3758/BF03194045
Kosslyn, S. M. (2006). Graph design for the eye and mind. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press.
Marino, A. C., & Scholl, B. J. (2005). The role of closure in defining the "objects" of object-based attention. Perception & Psychophysics, 67, 1140-1149. doi:10.3758/BF03193547
Scholl, B. J. (2001). Objects and attention: The state of the art. Cognition, 80, 1-46. doi:10.1016/S0010-0277(00)00152-9
Stone, E. R., Sieck, W. R., Bull, B. E., Yates, J. F., Parks, S. C., & Rush, C. J. (2003). Foreground: background salience:Explaining the effects of graphical displays on risk avoidance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 90, 19-36.
Stone, E. R., Yates, J. F., & Parker, A. M. (1997). Effects of numerical and graphical displays on professed risk-taking behavior. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Applied, 3, 243-256. doi:10.1037/1076-898X.3.4.243
Tufte, E. (1983). The visual display of quantitative information. Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press.
Zacks, J., Levy, E., Tversky, B., & Schiano, D. J. (1998). Reading bar graphs: Effects of extraneous depth cues and graphical context.Journal of Experimental Psychology. Applied, 4, 119-138.doi:10.1037/1076-898X.4.2.119
Zacks, J., & Tversky, B. (1999). Bars and lines: A study of graphic communication. Memory & Cognition, 27, 1073-1079. doi:10.3758/BF03201236