The Use of Iambic Pentameter in the

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Using the previously described type of stimuli, three experiments tested the time course of global and local grouping in interface displays. Experiment 1 was designed to test whether global depictions of Gestalt grouping principles are more salient than local depictions of these principles at short stimulus durations. To address this question, Hypothesis 1 was proposed. Hypothesis 1: At short exposure durations, users group elements in ambiguous interface displays by global Gestalt grouping principles. Conversely, at longer exposure durations, users can group elements in ambiguous interface displays by both global and local grouping principles. Another way to determine which grouping principles are first perceived is to determine which principles quicken RT. Experiment 2 was designed to test whether global depictions of Gestalt grouping principles can be grouped significantly faster than local depictions. To address this question, Hypothesis 2 was proposed. Hypothesis 2: It is hypothesized that users group interface displays by global grouping principles at a faster rate than they group by local grouping principles, when interface displays are presented for unlimited durations. If the results of Experiments 1 and 2 suggest that particular type of pushbutton grouping is more salient at short stimulus durations than another, this information might be used to redesign elemental organizations in user interface displays. How will these changes be received by users who are familiar with seeing displays with other types of configurations? Specifically, how does knowledge of what has ‘gone together’ in the past 68
influence what ‘goes together’ in the future in interface displays? As seen in research by Oliva and Schyns (1997), task diagnosticity has been shown to have an effect on perceptual organization by spatial scales. Furthermore, prior knowledge has been shown to have an effect in vision (e.g., Biederman, 1987; Peterson, 1994; Shepard, 1983). Experiment 3 was designed to test whether having prior knowledge of display groupings could affect user efficiency when users must rely on alternative groupings. To address this question, Hypothesis 3 was proposed. Hypothesis 3: It is hypothesized that when users have experience with grouping by particular size scale (global or local) in interface displays, it will be easiest for participants to group by this scale during future exposures to the display. 69
Page 1 and 2:
Time Course of Perceptual Grouping
Page 3 and 4:
Experiment 1 76 Method 76 Results a
Page 5 and 6:
List of Figures Figure 1. Illustrat
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
will look like and how it will comm
Page 13 and 14:
visibility of important interface e
Page 15 and 16:
displays are reported. Global and l
Page 17 and 18:
Electrical activity generated by th
Page 19 and 20:
would not be. It would be easier to
Page 21 and 22:
could be grouped by the principles
Page 23 and 24:
Figure 4. Gestalt principles of gro
Page 25 and 26: One of the leaders in grouping and
Page 27 and 28: defined by similar numbers. For exa
Page 29 and 30: and Saasrinen (2000) observed that
Page 31 and 32: proximity (Bailey, 1989; Bonney & W
Page 33 and 34: find the target ‘Picture’ in th
Page 35 and 36: Humans integrate many types of info
Page 37 and 38: measures. As a result, the pilot wo
Page 39 and 40: Figure 10. Pop-up advertisement wit
Page 41 and 42: soldiers see in these speeded condi
Page 43 and 44: 2001), grouping by proximity and al
Page 45 and 46: local letters, as illustrated by Fi
Page 47 and 48: frequency channels at specific rang
Page 49 and 50: Recent support for the Flexible Usa
Page 51 and 52: occluded shape as being incomplete
Page 53 and 54: search for the target in the experi
Page 55 and 56: Gestalt principle of good continuat
Page 57 and 58: columns of circles on the opposing
Page 59 and 60: short stimulus durations can be use
Page 61 and 62: Figure 15. Results for ambiguous pr
Page 63 and 64: As shown in Figure 16B, for the lig
Page 65 and 66: In review these findings, it become
Page 67 and 68: in user interface display layouts.
Page 69 and 70: were asked to make decisions about
Page 71 and 72: columns of pushbuttons on either si
Page 73 and 74: principles that are depicted more g
Page 75: no longer perceived. These cases wi
Page 79 and 80: participants, randomly with replace
Page 81 and 82: Figure 23. Targets used in reported
Page 83 and 84: participants that were more than th
Page 85 and 86: that was presented in the pilot exp
Page 87 and 88: from three participants because one
Page 89 and 90: see, each of the four distributions
Page 91 and 92: The distribution of data from each
Page 93 and 94: Figure 28. Targets for Experiment 2
Page 95 and 96: Results and discussion Sixteen fema
Page 97 and 98: global grouping was significantly f
Page 99 and 100: Figure 32A depicts a box plot for g
Page 101 and 102: means, the Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Te
Page 103 and 104: to group by the alternative scale.
Page 105 and 106: Table 4. Characteristics of RT dist
Page 107 and 108: General Discussion Research that ha
Page 109 and 110: Experiments 2A and 2B were designed
Page 111 and 112: the size scale within an existing i
Page 113 and 114: “Hotmail” has been reported to
Page 115 and 116: They are interesting within the con
Page 117 and 118: forms of similarity could also be t
Page 119 and 120: the context of vision science resea
Page 121 and 122: Bennett, K. B., Nagy, A. L., and Fl
Page 123 and 124: De Valois, R. L. & De Valois, K. K.
Page 125 and 126: Johnston, W.A., Schwarting, I.S. &
Page 127 and 128:
Nass, C., Isbister, K., & Lee, E.J.
Page 129 and 130:
Palmer, S. E. & Rock, I. (1994). Re
Page 131 and 132:
Sanocki, T.(2001). Interaction of s
Page 133 and 134:
Tullis, T. S. (1981). An evaluation
Page 135:
About the Author Melissa F. Schulz
show all

The Use of Iambic Pentameter in the

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?