Abstract
Philosophers and practitioners commonly distinguish between descriptions, depictions and diagrams as visual representations. But how are we to understand the differences between these representational types? Many suggestions have been made, all of them unsatisfactory. A common assumption has been that these representational types must be evaluated in terms of the presence or absence of a single property. I argue that this assumption is both questionable and overly restrictive, and advance a two-property analysis in terms of what I call Assimilability and Discretion. I argue that this analysis allows us give a general differentiation of the various types and to understand better what factors could affect changes in classification. This suggests an outline framework for empirical research. Philosophically, it can also be used to capture a core idea of perspicuousness, and to ground an argument for the general perspicuousness of diagrams as a representational type.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Barwise, J., Hammer, E.: Diagrams and the Concept of Logical System. In: Allwein, G., Barwise, J.: Logical Reasoning with Diagrams. Oxford University Press (1996) 49–78
Eberle, R.: Diagrams and Natural Deduction: Theory and Pedagogy of Hyperproof. PhD thesis, Indiana University (1995)
Goodman, N.: Languages of Art. Hackett, Indianapolis(1976)
Harris, R.: Information Graphics: A Comprehensive Illustrated Reference. Management Graphics, Atlanta(1996)
Hopkins, R.:Picture, Image and Experience. Cambridge University Press (1998)
Kosslyn, S.: Elements of Graph Design. Freeman, Oxford (1994)
Larkin, J., Simon, H.: Why a Diagram is (Sometimes) Worth Ten Thousand Words. Cognitive Science 11, (1987) 65–100
Norman, J.: Diagrammatic Reasoning and Propositional Logic. MPhil Thesis, University College London (1999)
Shimojima, A.: Constraints in Diagrammatic Reasoning. In: Allwein, G., Barwise, J.: Logical Reasoning with Diagrams. Oxford University Press (1996) 27–48
Shimojima, A.: On the Efficacy of Representation. PhD Thesis, Indiana University (1996)
Sperber, D., Wilson, D.: Relevance. Blackwell, Oxford (1986)
Tufte, E.: The Visual Display of Quantitative Information. Graphics Press, Connecticut (1983)
Tufte, E.: Visual Explanations. Graphics Press, Connecticut (1997)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2000 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Norman, J. (2000). Differentiating Diagrams: A New Approach. In: Anderson, M., Cheng, P., Haarslev, V. (eds) Theory and Application of Diagrams. Diagrams 2000. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 1889. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44590-0_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44590-0_13
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-67915-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-44590-6
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive