Gary W. Dickson
Abstract
A total of 840 junior and senior-level undergraduate business students particpated in three experiments that compared computer-generated graphical forms of data presentation to traditional tabular reports. The first experiment compared tables and bar charts for their effects on readability, interpretation accuracy, and decision making. No differences in interpretation accuracy or decision quality were observed for the two groups, although tabular reports were rated as "easier to read and understand" than graphical reports. The second experiment compared line plots to tables for their effects on interpretation accuracy and decision quality. Subjects with graphical reports outperformed those with tables. There were no meaningful differences in interpretation accuracy across treatment groups. The third experiment compared graphical and tabular reports for their ability to convey a "message" to the reader. Only in situations in which a vast amount of information was presented and relatively simple impressions were to be made, did subjects given graphs outperform those using tables.
This program of cumulative experiments indicates that generalized claims of superiority of graphic presentation are unsupported, at least for decision-related activities. In fact, the experiments suggest that the effectiveness of the data display format is largely a function of the characteristics of the task at hand, and that impressions gleaned from "one shot" studies of the effectiveness of the use of graphs may be nothing more than situationally dependent artifacts.
- 1 Benbasat, I. and Dexter. AS. An experimental evaluation of graphical and color-enhanced information presentation. Manage. Sci., to be published.Google Scholar
- 2 Benbasat. I. and Schroeder, R. An experimental investigation of some MIS design variables. MIS Q. I, 1 (1977). 37-50.Google Scholar
- 3 Carter, L.F. An experiment on the design of tables and graphs used for presenting numerical data. J Appl. Psychol. 31, (1947), 640-650.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 4 Carter, L.F. Relative effectiveness of presenting numerical data by the use of tables and graphs. U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, DC, 1946.Google Scholar
- 5 DeSanctjs. G. Computer graphics as decision aids: Directions for research. Deck. Sci. 15, 4 (1964). 463-467.Google Scholar
- 6 Feliciano, G.D., Powers, R.D., and Bryant, E.K. The presentation of statistical information. Audio Visual Commun. Rev. II, 13 (1963). 32-39.Google Scholar
- 7 Ghani, }.A. The effects of information representation and modification of decision performance. Ph.D. dissertation, Univ. of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, 1981.Google Scholar
- 8 Ghani. 1.A. and Lusk, E.J. Human information processing research: Its MIS design consequences. Hum. Syst. Manage. 3, 1 (1962), 32-40.Google Scholar
- 9 Gerry. G.A., and Scott-Morton, MS. A framework for management information systems. Sloan Manage. Rev. 13. 1 (1971), 55-70.Google Scholar
- 10 Grace, G.L. Application of empirical methods to computer-based system design. J. Appl. Psychol. 50, (1966), 442-450.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 11 Ives, B. Graphical user interfaces for business information systems. MlS Q., Special Issue, (1982), 15-47.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 12 Jarett. I.M. Computer Graphics and Reporting Financial Data. Wiley, New York, 1983. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 13 Lucas, H.C. An experimental investigation of the use of computerbased graphics in decision making. Manage. Sci. 27, 7 (19&U), 757- 766.Google ScholarDigital Library
- 14 MacDonald-Ross. M. How numbers are shown. Audio-visual Commu". Rev. 25, 4 (1977). 359-409.Google Scholar
- 15 Nawrocki, L.H. Alphanumeric versus graphic displays in a problemsolving task. Tech. Res. Note 227, U.S. Army Behavior and Systems Research Laboratory, Arlington, Va., Sept. 1972.Google Scholar
- 16 Payne, J.W. Contingent decision behavior. Psychol. Bull. 92, (1982), 382-402.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 17 Powers, M. Lashley, C., Sanchez. P. and Schneiderman, B. An experimental comparison on tabular and graphic data presentation. Computer Science Department, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, Feb. 1962. unpublished.Google Scholar
- 18 Takeuchi, H., and Schmidt, A.H. New promise of computer graphics. Harvard Bus. RPU. 58, 1 (1980). 122-131.Google Scholar
- 19 Tullis. T.S. An evaluation of alphanumeric, graphic, and color displays. Hunt. Facfors 23, 5 (1981), 541-550.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 20 Vernon, M.D. The use and value of graphical material in presenting quantitative data. Occup. Psychol. 26, (1952), 22-34.Google Scholar
- 21 Wainer, H. and Reiser, M. Assessing the efficacy of visual displays. In Proceedings of the American Stafistical Association, I, Social Statistics Section, (1976), pp. 89-92.Google Scholar
- 22 Wilcox, W. Numbers and the news: Graph, table or text. Journalism Q. 41. (1964), 38-44.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 23 Zmud. R.W., Blocher. E., and Moffie, R.P. The impact of color graphic report formats on decision performance and learning. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Information Systems, Society for Information Management, Chicago, Ill., 1983.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Understanding the effectiveness of computer graphics for decision support: a cumulative experimental approach
Recommendations
Understanding decision-support effectiveness: a computer simulation approach
Special section: Best papers from the 2007 biometrics: Theory, applications, and systems (BTAS 07) conferenceThe interplay between decision-making and decision-support tools has proven puzzling for many years. One of the most popular decision-support tools, what-if analysis, is no exception. Decades of empirical studies have found positive, negative, and null ...
A Visual Analytics Approach to Understanding Spatiotemporal Hotspots
As data sources become larger and more complex, the ability to effectively explore and analyze patterns among varying sources becomes a critical bottleneck in analytic reasoning. Incoming data contain multiple variables, high signal-to-noise ratio, and a ...
Reviews
Philip Barnard
Under what conditions should information be presented in graphs rather than tables__?__ Answers to this question are of key importance to the designers and users of decision support systems. Experimental work has, as yet, provided little in the way of clear answers. This paper contributes to the debate by reporting three experiments that examined the effectiveness of graphs and tables as aids to decision making. In these experiments, the authors vary the nature of the decision making tasks. With a simple task, graphical and tabular formats for presenting information resulted in similar levels of user performance. With a more complex task, graphical presentation proved superior. For tasks of even greater complexity, users of graphs marginally outperformed users of tables, but only under conditions of high information load. In highlighting the importance of task conditions, this research makes a valuable contribution. The effectiveness of alternative formats for information presentation clearly depends upon what the information is being used for. However, in order to understand how information is being used, it is necessary to relate the precise structure and content of tables and graphs to the nature of the decisions being made. Without a penetrating analysis of this sort, it is difficult to assess whether or not the most appropriate form of graphical presentation was being compared with the most appropriate type of table. Until such analyses are forthcoming, robust answers to the essential question are not going to emerge, and guidelines based upon this sort of evidence should be viewed with caution.
Access critical reviews of Computing literature here
Become a reviewer for Computing Reviews.
Comments