Why a Diagram Is (Sometimes) Worth Ten Thousand Words¶
Larkin, J. H., & Simon, H. A. (1987). Why a Diagram Is (Sometimes) Worth Ten Thousand Words. Cognitive Science, 11(1), 65-100.
Cited by¶
2 citations across 2 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Representational Modality
- The choice of medium through which information is encoded and transmitted—visual, auditory, tactile, olfactory, or multimodal—fundamentally shapes what can be expressed, what is easily understood, and what actions become possible, as Larkin and Simon (1987) argued in their analysis of how informationally equivalent representations differ in computational efficiency.
This sourceFoundational analysis demonstrating that informationally equivalent diagrammatic and sentential representations differ sharply in computational efficiency; the medium of expression shapes what inferences are easy or hard.
Supported in partVerified against the publisher's abstract
The abstract supports only the narrow point that informationally equivalent diagrammatic and sentential representations differ in computational efficiency, not the sensory-modality claim.
“When two representations are informationally equivalent, their computational efficiency depends on the information‐processing operators that act on them.”
- The choice of medium through which information is encoded and transmitted—visual, auditory, tactile, olfactory, or multimodal—fundamentally shapes what can be expressed, what is easily understood, and what actions become possible, as Larkin and Simon (1987) argued in their analysis of how informationally equivalent representations differ in computational efficiency.
Domain-specific¶
Verification¶
Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 1 of 2 citations: 1 supported in part. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:1d7fb1cc8401 · see in the full table