Investigating the Empirical Validity of Salience Theory: The Role of Display Format Effects

A study was conducted to determine how well the display format effects described by Tullis (1983, 1984) and the resulting prediction equations could be generalized to other display situations. Task complexity and visual monitoring load were identified as task variables which could potentially moderate the format effects and, thus, were varied factorially. The current study also sought to extend Tullis's findings to tasks where the use of several pieces of information from predictable display locations is required. In general, the data indicate the need to study Tullis's format dimensions more fully before using his regression equations to evaluate display designs for use outside the task situation in which the equations were developed. Also, subjects were unable to evaluate their performance accurately under alternative display designs. Their evaluations seemed to be determined mostly by the perceived ease with which information was extracted from the display. This outcome should serve as a warning to system designers. That is, empirical human performance research should be conducted when performance is the paramount design criterion and a validated prediction system, such as the one developed by Tullis for search, is not available.

Download Full-text

Preliminary evaluation of display format effects on perceptibility in a low contrast ultrasound test object

Medical Physics ◽

10.1118/1.594900 ◽

1981 ◽

Vol 8 (2) ◽

pp. 155-157 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

F. Graham Sommer ◽

Stelios C. Orphanoudakis ◽

Kenneth J. W. Taylor

Keyword(s):

Test Object ◽

Preliminary Evaluation ◽

Low Contrast ◽

Display Format ◽

Format Effects ◽

Contrast Ultrasound

Download Full-text

Presentation format effects in working memory: The role of attention

Memory & Cognition ◽

10.3758/bf03193067 ◽

2005 ◽

Vol 33 (3) ◽

pp. 499-513 ◽

Cited By ~ 14

Author(s):

Paul W. Foos ◽

Paula Goolksian

Keyword(s):

Working Memory ◽

Presentation Format ◽

Format Effects

Download Full-text

Deciding for Responsibility and Legitimation: Alternative Interpretations of Organizational Decision‐Making

10.1093/oso/9780199206285.003.0002 ◽

2017 ◽

Author(s):

Nils Brunsson

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

Local Governments ◽

Empirical Studies ◽

Decision Processes ◽

Decision Makers ◽

Organizational Decision Making ◽

Empirical Validity ◽

Organizational Action ◽

National Governments

Recent studies have questioned the empirical validity of the equating of decision and choice and pointed at another role that organizational decisions sometimes play — the role of mobilizing organizational action, a role that requires less rationality than choice. But choice and mobilization are not the only roles of decision-making and decisions in organizations. This chapter argues that two additional roles exist — decisions may allocate responsibility and legitimacy to decision-makers and organizations. The chapter also considers how the different roles can explain the design of decision processes, the use of information and the number of decisions in organizations. The discussion is based on empirical studies of decision processes in such organizations: in local governments, national governments, and company boards. The eight decision processes studied concern city budgets, investments and disinvestments, and governmental programmes.

Download Full-text