PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 27, 2026Cognitive Science0 citationsOpen Access

Asymmetric Shape Variability Biases Proportion Judgments With Icon Arrays

View Full Paper
DMDouglas B. Markant

Key Points

  • This study aims to investigate how the perceptual characteristics of icon arrays influence proportion judgments.
  • Conducted three experiments with icon arrays that varied in spatial configuration (grouped vs. random) and shape variability.
  • Participants performed proportion judgment tasks involving filled and unfilled icons to represent target and nontarget proportions.
  • Analyzed the effects of shape variability on perceived numerosity in different arrangements.
  • Grouped icon arrays showed highly accurate proportion judgments, unaffected by shape variability.
  • Randomly arranged icon arrays demonstrated biased judgments when one category featured irrelevant shape variability.
  • Participants perceived increased quantities for categories with consistent shapes, impacting risk perception.

Abstract

Icon arrays are graphical displays in which a subset of shapes are filled to represent the probability of an outcome (e.g., the probability of side-effects from a medical treatment). Prior work has shown that the perceptions of probabilities can be more accurate with icon arrays compared to other formats. As a result, they are now widely used to communicate information about risk and uncertainty to the general public. However, little is known about how the design of icon arrays-in particular, the perceptual characteristics of icons and their spatial arrangement-affect perceptions of risk. The present study builds on research on visual perception which suggests that variation in icon shape may affect their perceived numerosity. Three experiments were conducted using a proportion judgment task with icon arrays that varied in (a) whether icons were organized in grouped or random configurations, and (b) whether there was variability in the icon shapes used to represent the target and nontarget proportions. The results show that proportion judgments are highly accurate for grouped arrays, with no effect of shape variability regardless of the distribution of shapes across the target and nontarget categories. For random spatial arrangements, however, irrelevant shape variability in one (but not both) of the categories leads to biased proportion judgments, increasing the perceived quantity of whichever category has elements with the same shape. These findings show that perceptual variation in shape-while irrelevant to the proportion judgment task-can alter how people perceive quantities depicted by icon arrays, providing new insight into how these visualizations should be designed to communicate information about risk.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Douglas B. Markant (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a168ae40c924ddd1bd59bcchttps://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.70227
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Picture this: a new way of seeing risk2008 · 1 citations
  2. 2Foreground:background salience: Explaining the effects of graphical displays on risk avoidance2003 · 172 citations
  3. 3What attributes guide the deployment of visual attention and how do they do it?2004 · 1,782 citations
  4. 4A century of Gestalt psychology in visual perception: I. Perceptual grouping and figure–ground organization.2012 · 1,575 citations
  5. 5Fundamental units of numerosity estimation2023 · 10 citations