Abstract
Theories of diagrammatic reasoning typically seek to account for either the formal semantics of diagrams, or for the cognitive advantages which diagrams hold over other forms of representation. Regrettably, almost no theory exists which accounts for these issues jointly, nor how they affect one another. This chapter sets out the basis for such a combined theory, the main parts being: a principled exploration of the fundamental components of diagrammatic languages; semantic and cognitive perspectives on reasoning in diagrams; and the relation between these three parts. This chapter thus lays out a larger context than is generally used for examining the use of diagrams in reasoning or communication. A context in which detailed studies of sub-problems — here, what it is that makes diagrams effective — may be embedded.
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
Glasgow, J., Narayan, N.H. and Chandrasekaran, B. (1995). Diagrammatic reasoning: Cognitive and computational perspectives. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Narayan, N.H. and Hübscher, R. (1998). Visual language theory: Towards a human-computer interaction perspective. In K. Marriot and B. Meyer (Eds), Visual language theory. Berlin: Springer, Ch. 3.
Myers, M. and Konolige, K. (1995). Reasoning with analogical representations. In J. Glasgow, N.H. Narayan, and B. Chandrasekaran (Eds), Diagrammatic reasoning: Cognitive and computational perspectives. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 273-302.
Shin, S-J. (1995). The logical status of diagrams. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Sowa, J.F. (1993). Relating diagrams to logic. In Conceptual graphs for knowledge representation: Proceedings of 1st international conference on conceptual structures. LNAI 699. Berlin: Springer.
Allwein, G. and Barwise, J. (1996). Logical reasoning with diagrams. New York: Oxford University Press.
Blackwell, A.F. and Green, T.R.G. (1999). Does metaphor increase visual language usability? In 15th IEEE symposium on visual languages (VL’99). Los Alamitos CA: IEEE Computer Society Press, pp. 246-253.
Blackwell, A.F., Whitley, K.N., Good, J. and Petre, M. (in press). Cognitive factors in programming with diagrams. Artificial Intelligence Review (special issue on thinking with diagrams).
Campbell, K.J, Collis, K.F. and Watson, J.M. (1995). Visual processing during mathematical problem solving. Educational Studies in Mathematics 28:177-194.
Hegarty, M. (1992). Mental animation: Inferring motion from static displays of mechanical systems. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 18(5):1084-1102.
Petre, M. (1995). Why looking isn’t always seeing: Readership skills and graphical programming. Communications of the ACM 38(6):33-45.
Zhang, J. and Norman, D. (1994). Representations in distributed cognitive tasks. Cognitive Science 18:87-122.
Gurr, C.A. (1999). Effective diagrammatic communication: Syntactic, semantic and pragmatic issues. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing 10(4):317-342.
Morris, C.W. (1938). Foundations of a theory of signs. In O. Neurath, R. Carnap and C. Morris (Eds), International encyclopedia of unified science. Chicago: Chicago University Press, pp. 77-138.
Gurr, C. (1998). On the isomorphism, or lack of it, of representations. In K. Marriot and B. Meyer (Eds), Visual language theory. Berlin: Springer, Ch. 10.
Wang, D. and Lee, J. (1993). Visual reasoning: Its formal semantics and applications. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing 4:327-356.
Gentner, D. (1983). Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science 7:155-170.
Gazdar, G. (1979). Pragmatics: Implicature, presupposition and logical form. New York: Academic Press.
Levinson, S.C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Gun, C., Lee, J. and Stenning, K. (1998). Theories of diagrammatic reasoning: Distinguishing component problems. Mind and Machines 8(4):533-557.
Marks, J. and Reiter, E. (1990). Avoiding unwanted conversational implicature in text and graphics. In Proceedings of the eighth national conference on artificial intelligence (AAAI-90). Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press, pp. 450-456.
Oberlander, J. (1996). Grice for graphics: Pragmatic implicature in network diagrams. Information Design Journal 8(2):163-179.
Petre, M. and Green, T.R.G. (1992). Requirements of graphical notations for professional users: Electronics CAD systems as a case study. Le Travail Humain 55:47-70.
Shimojima, A. (1996). Operational constraints in diagrammatic reasoning. In J. Barwise and G. Allwein (Eds), Logical reasoning with diagrams. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 27-48.
Stenning, K., Cox, R. and Oberlander, J. (1995). Contrasting the cognitive effects of graphical and sentential logic teaching: Reasoning, representation and individual differences. Language and Cognitive Processes 10(3/4):333-354.
Stenning, K. and Yule, P. (1997). Image and language in human reasoning: A syllogistic illustration. Cognitive Psychology 34(2):109-159.
Stenning, K. and Inder, R. (1995). Applying semantic concepts to analysing media and modalities. In J. Glasgow, N.H. Narayan and B. Chandrasekaran (Eds), Diagrammatic reasoning: Cognitive and computational perspectives. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 303-338.
Palmer, S.E. (1978). Fundamental aspects of cognitive representation. In E. Rosch and B.B. Lloyd (Eds), Cognition and categorisation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 259-303.
Barwise, J. and Etchemendy, J. (1994). Hyperproof. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2002 Springer-Verlag London
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Gurr, C.A. (2002). Combining Semantic and Cognitive Accounts of Diagrams. In: Anderson, M., Meyer, B., Olivier, P. (eds) Diagrammatic Representation and Reasoning. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-0109-3_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-0109-3_7
Publisher Name: Springer, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-85233-242-6
Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-0109-3
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive