Expert interpretation of bar and line graphs: The role of graphicacy in reducing the effect of graph format.
The distinction between informational and computational equivalence of representations, first articulated by Larkin and Simon (1987) has been a fundamental principle in the analysis of diagrammatic reasoning which has been supported empirically on numerous occasions. We present an experiment that i...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Autor*in: |
David ePeebles [verfasserIn] Nadia eAli [verfasserIn] |
---|
Format: |
E-Artikel |
---|---|
Sprache: |
Englisch |
Erschienen: |
2015 |
---|
Schlagwörter: |
---|
Übergeordnetes Werk: |
In: Frontiers in Psychology - Frontiers Media S.A., 2010, 6(2015) |
---|---|
Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:6 ; year:2015 |
Links: |
---|
DOI / URN: |
10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01673 |
---|
Katalog-ID: |
DOAJ044904185 |
---|
LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
---|---|---|---|
001 | DOAJ044904185 | ||
003 | DE-627 | ||
005 | 20230502070539.0 | ||
007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
008 | 230227s2015 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
024 | 7 | |a 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01673 |2 doi | |
035 | |a (DE-627)DOAJ044904185 | ||
035 | |a (DE-599)DOAJ10370913a18e48219c4e6c1aa59f4276 | ||
040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
041 | |a eng | ||
050 | 0 | |a BF1-990 | |
100 | 0 | |a David ePeebles |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
245 | 1 | 0 | |a Expert interpretation of bar and line graphs: The role of graphicacy in reducing the effect of graph format. |
264 | 1 | |c 2015 | |
336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
520 | |a The distinction between informational and computational equivalence of representations, first articulated by Larkin and Simon (1987) has been a fundamental principle in the analysis of diagrammatic reasoning which has been supported empirically on numerous occasions. We present an experiment that investigates this principle in relation to the performance of expert graph users of 2 x 2 'interaction' bar and line graphs. The study sought to determine whether expert interpretation is affected by graph format in the same way that novice interpretations are. The findings revealed that, unlike novices - and contrary to the assumptions of several graph comprehension models - experts' performance was the same for both graph formats, with their interpretation of bar graphs being no worse than that for line graphs. We discuss the implications of the study for guidelines for presenting such data and for models of expert graph comprehension. | ||
650 | 4 | |a Expertise | |
650 | 4 | |a diagrammatic reasoning | |
650 | 4 | |a spatial reasoning | |
650 | 4 | |a verbal protocols | |
650 | 4 | |a Graph comprehension | |
653 | 0 | |a Psychology | |
700 | 0 | |a Nadia eAli |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
773 | 0 | 8 | |i In |t Frontiers in Psychology |d Frontiers Media S.A., 2010 |g 6(2015) |w (DE-627)631495711 |w (DE-600)2563826-9 |x 16641078 |7 nnns |
773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:6 |g year:2015 |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01673 |z kostenfrei |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doaj.org/article/10370913a18e48219c4e6c1aa59f4276 |z kostenfrei |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://journal.frontiersin.org/Journal/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01673/full |z kostenfrei |
856 | 4 | 2 | |u https://doaj.org/toc/1664-1078 |y Journal toc |z kostenfrei |
912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
912 | |a SYSFLAG_A | ||
912 | |a GBV_DOAJ | ||
912 | |a SSG-OLC-PHA | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_11 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_20 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_22 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_23 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_24 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_31 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_32 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_39 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_40 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_60 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_62 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_63 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_65 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_69 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_70 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_73 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_74 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_90 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_95 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_100 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_101 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_105 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_110 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_138 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_151 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_152 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_161 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_187 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_206 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_213 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_230 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_250 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_281 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_285 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_293 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_602 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_647 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_702 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2003 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2009 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2014 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2086 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4012 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4037 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4112 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4125 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4126 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4249 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4305 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4306 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4307 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4313 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4322 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4323 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4324 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4325 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4326 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4335 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4338 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4367 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4700 | ||
951 | |a AR | ||
952 | |d 6 |j 2015 |
author_variant |
d e de n e ne |
---|---|
matchkey_str |
article:16641078:2015----::xetnepeainfaadierpshrlogahccirdcn |
hierarchy_sort_str |
2015 |
callnumber-subject-code |
BF |
publishDate |
2015 |
allfields |
10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01673 doi (DE-627)DOAJ044904185 (DE-599)DOAJ10370913a18e48219c4e6c1aa59f4276 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng BF1-990 David ePeebles verfasserin aut Expert interpretation of bar and line graphs: The role of graphicacy in reducing the effect of graph format. 2015 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier The distinction between informational and computational equivalence of representations, first articulated by Larkin and Simon (1987) has been a fundamental principle in the analysis of diagrammatic reasoning which has been supported empirically on numerous occasions. We present an experiment that investigates this principle in relation to the performance of expert graph users of 2 x 2 'interaction' bar and line graphs. The study sought to determine whether expert interpretation is affected by graph format in the same way that novice interpretations are. The findings revealed that, unlike novices - and contrary to the assumptions of several graph comprehension models - experts' performance was the same for both graph formats, with their interpretation of bar graphs being no worse than that for line graphs. We discuss the implications of the study for guidelines for presenting such data and for models of expert graph comprehension. Expertise diagrammatic reasoning spatial reasoning verbal protocols Graph comprehension Psychology Nadia eAli verfasserin aut In Frontiers in Psychology Frontiers Media S.A., 2010 6(2015) (DE-627)631495711 (DE-600)2563826-9 16641078 nnns volume:6 year:2015 https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01673 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/10370913a18e48219c4e6c1aa59f4276 kostenfrei http://journal.frontiersin.org/Journal/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01673/full kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1664-1078 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_647 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 6 2015 |
spelling |
10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01673 doi (DE-627)DOAJ044904185 (DE-599)DOAJ10370913a18e48219c4e6c1aa59f4276 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng BF1-990 David ePeebles verfasserin aut Expert interpretation of bar and line graphs: The role of graphicacy in reducing the effect of graph format. 2015 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier The distinction between informational and computational equivalence of representations, first articulated by Larkin and Simon (1987) has been a fundamental principle in the analysis of diagrammatic reasoning which has been supported empirically on numerous occasions. We present an experiment that investigates this principle in relation to the performance of expert graph users of 2 x 2 'interaction' bar and line graphs. The study sought to determine whether expert interpretation is affected by graph format in the same way that novice interpretations are. The findings revealed that, unlike novices - and contrary to the assumptions of several graph comprehension models - experts' performance was the same for both graph formats, with their interpretation of bar graphs being no worse than that for line graphs. We discuss the implications of the study for guidelines for presenting such data and for models of expert graph comprehension. Expertise diagrammatic reasoning spatial reasoning verbal protocols Graph comprehension Psychology Nadia eAli verfasserin aut In Frontiers in Psychology Frontiers Media S.A., 2010 6(2015) (DE-627)631495711 (DE-600)2563826-9 16641078 nnns volume:6 year:2015 https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01673 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/10370913a18e48219c4e6c1aa59f4276 kostenfrei http://journal.frontiersin.org/Journal/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01673/full kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1664-1078 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_647 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 6 2015 |
allfields_unstemmed |
10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01673 doi (DE-627)DOAJ044904185 (DE-599)DOAJ10370913a18e48219c4e6c1aa59f4276 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng BF1-990 David ePeebles verfasserin aut Expert interpretation of bar and line graphs: The role of graphicacy in reducing the effect of graph format. 2015 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier The distinction between informational and computational equivalence of representations, first articulated by Larkin and Simon (1987) has been a fundamental principle in the analysis of diagrammatic reasoning which has been supported empirically on numerous occasions. We present an experiment that investigates this principle in relation to the performance of expert graph users of 2 x 2 'interaction' bar and line graphs. The study sought to determine whether expert interpretation is affected by graph format in the same way that novice interpretations are. The findings revealed that, unlike novices - and contrary to the assumptions of several graph comprehension models - experts' performance was the same for both graph formats, with their interpretation of bar graphs being no worse than that for line graphs. We discuss the implications of the study for guidelines for presenting such data and for models of expert graph comprehension. Expertise diagrammatic reasoning spatial reasoning verbal protocols Graph comprehension Psychology Nadia eAli verfasserin aut In Frontiers in Psychology Frontiers Media S.A., 2010 6(2015) (DE-627)631495711 (DE-600)2563826-9 16641078 nnns volume:6 year:2015 https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01673 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/10370913a18e48219c4e6c1aa59f4276 kostenfrei http://journal.frontiersin.org/Journal/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01673/full kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1664-1078 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_647 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 6 2015 |
allfieldsGer |
10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01673 doi (DE-627)DOAJ044904185 (DE-599)DOAJ10370913a18e48219c4e6c1aa59f4276 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng BF1-990 David ePeebles verfasserin aut Expert interpretation of bar and line graphs: The role of graphicacy in reducing the effect of graph format. 2015 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier The distinction between informational and computational equivalence of representations, first articulated by Larkin and Simon (1987) has been a fundamental principle in the analysis of diagrammatic reasoning which has been supported empirically on numerous occasions. We present an experiment that investigates this principle in relation to the performance of expert graph users of 2 x 2 'interaction' bar and line graphs. The study sought to determine whether expert interpretation is affected by graph format in the same way that novice interpretations are. The findings revealed that, unlike novices - and contrary to the assumptions of several graph comprehension models - experts' performance was the same for both graph formats, with their interpretation of bar graphs being no worse than that for line graphs. We discuss the implications of the study for guidelines for presenting such data and for models of expert graph comprehension. Expertise diagrammatic reasoning spatial reasoning verbal protocols Graph comprehension Psychology Nadia eAli verfasserin aut In Frontiers in Psychology Frontiers Media S.A., 2010 6(2015) (DE-627)631495711 (DE-600)2563826-9 16641078 nnns volume:6 year:2015 https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01673 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/10370913a18e48219c4e6c1aa59f4276 kostenfrei http://journal.frontiersin.org/Journal/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01673/full kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1664-1078 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_647 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 6 2015 |
allfieldsSound |
10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01673 doi (DE-627)DOAJ044904185 (DE-599)DOAJ10370913a18e48219c4e6c1aa59f4276 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng BF1-990 David ePeebles verfasserin aut Expert interpretation of bar and line graphs: The role of graphicacy in reducing the effect of graph format. 2015 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier The distinction between informational and computational equivalence of representations, first articulated by Larkin and Simon (1987) has been a fundamental principle in the analysis of diagrammatic reasoning which has been supported empirically on numerous occasions. We present an experiment that investigates this principle in relation to the performance of expert graph users of 2 x 2 'interaction' bar and line graphs. The study sought to determine whether expert interpretation is affected by graph format in the same way that novice interpretations are. The findings revealed that, unlike novices - and contrary to the assumptions of several graph comprehension models - experts' performance was the same for both graph formats, with their interpretation of bar graphs being no worse than that for line graphs. We discuss the implications of the study for guidelines for presenting such data and for models of expert graph comprehension. Expertise diagrammatic reasoning spatial reasoning verbal protocols Graph comprehension Psychology Nadia eAli verfasserin aut In Frontiers in Psychology Frontiers Media S.A., 2010 6(2015) (DE-627)631495711 (DE-600)2563826-9 16641078 nnns volume:6 year:2015 https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01673 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/10370913a18e48219c4e6c1aa59f4276 kostenfrei http://journal.frontiersin.org/Journal/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01673/full kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1664-1078 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_647 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 6 2015 |
language |
English |
source |
In Frontiers in Psychology 6(2015) volume:6 year:2015 |
sourceStr |
In Frontiers in Psychology 6(2015) volume:6 year:2015 |
format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
institution |
findex.gbv.de |
topic_facet |
Expertise diagrammatic reasoning spatial reasoning verbal protocols Graph comprehension Psychology |
isfreeaccess_bool |
true |
container_title |
Frontiers in Psychology |
authorswithroles_txt_mv |
David ePeebles @@aut@@ Nadia eAli @@aut@@ |
publishDateDaySort_date |
2015-01-01T00:00:00Z |
hierarchy_top_id |
631495711 |
id |
DOAJ044904185 |
language_de |
englisch |
fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ044904185</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230502070539.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230227s2015 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01673</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ044904185</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJ10370913a18e48219c4e6c1aa59f4276</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">BF1-990</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">David ePeebles</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Expert interpretation of bar and line graphs: The role of graphicacy in reducing the effect of graph format.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">The distinction between informational and computational equivalence of representations, first articulated by Larkin and Simon (1987) has been a fundamental principle in the analysis of diagrammatic reasoning which has been supported empirically on numerous occasions. We present an experiment that investigates this principle in relation to the performance of expert graph users of 2 x 2 'interaction' bar and line graphs. The study sought to determine whether expert interpretation is affected by graph format in the same way that novice interpretations are. The findings revealed that, unlike novices - and contrary to the assumptions of several graph comprehension models - experts' performance was the same for both graph formats, with their interpretation of bar graphs being no worse than that for line graphs. We discuss the implications of the study for guidelines for presenting such data and for models of expert graph comprehension.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Expertise</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">diagrammatic reasoning</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">spatial reasoning</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">verbal protocols</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Graph comprehension</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Psychology</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Nadia eAli</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Frontiers in Psychology</subfield><subfield code="d">Frontiers Media S.A., 2010</subfield><subfield code="g">6(2015)</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)631495711</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2563826-9</subfield><subfield code="x">16641078</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:6</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01673</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/10370913a18e48219c4e6c1aa59f4276</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://journal.frontiersin.org/Journal/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01673/full</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/1664-1078</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_32</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_90</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_100</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_101</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_138</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_187</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_250</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_281</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_647</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2086</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">6</subfield><subfield code="j">2015</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
callnumber-first |
B - Philosophy, Psychology, Religion |
author |
David ePeebles |
spellingShingle |
David ePeebles misc BF1-990 misc Expertise misc diagrammatic reasoning misc spatial reasoning misc verbal protocols misc Graph comprehension misc Psychology Expert interpretation of bar and line graphs: The role of graphicacy in reducing the effect of graph format. |
authorStr |
David ePeebles |
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)631495711 |
format |
electronic Article |
delete_txt_mv |
keep |
author_role |
aut aut |
collection |
DOAJ |
remote_str |
true |
callnumber-label |
BF1-990 |
illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
issn |
16641078 |
topic_title |
BF1-990 Expert interpretation of bar and line graphs: The role of graphicacy in reducing the effect of graph format Expertise diagrammatic reasoning spatial reasoning verbal protocols Graph comprehension |
topic |
misc BF1-990 misc Expertise misc diagrammatic reasoning misc spatial reasoning misc verbal protocols misc Graph comprehension misc Psychology |
topic_unstemmed |
misc BF1-990 misc Expertise misc diagrammatic reasoning misc spatial reasoning misc verbal protocols misc Graph comprehension misc Psychology |
topic_browse |
misc BF1-990 misc Expertise misc diagrammatic reasoning misc spatial reasoning misc verbal protocols misc Graph comprehension misc Psychology |
format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
carriertype_str_mv |
cr |
hierarchy_parent_title |
Frontiers in Psychology |
hierarchy_parent_id |
631495711 |
hierarchy_top_title |
Frontiers in Psychology |
isfreeaccess_txt |
true |
familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)631495711 (DE-600)2563826-9 |
title |
Expert interpretation of bar and line graphs: The role of graphicacy in reducing the effect of graph format. |
ctrlnum |
(DE-627)DOAJ044904185 (DE-599)DOAJ10370913a18e48219c4e6c1aa59f4276 |
title_full |
Expert interpretation of bar and line graphs: The role of graphicacy in reducing the effect of graph format |
author_sort |
David ePeebles |
journal |
Frontiers in Psychology |
journalStr |
Frontiers in Psychology |
callnumber-first-code |
B |
lang_code |
eng |
isOA_bool |
true |
recordtype |
marc |
publishDateSort |
2015 |
contenttype_str_mv |
txt |
author_browse |
David ePeebles Nadia eAli |
container_volume |
6 |
class |
BF1-990 |
format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
author-letter |
David ePeebles |
doi_str_mv |
10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01673 |
author2-role |
verfasserin |
title_sort |
expert interpretation of bar and line graphs: the role of graphicacy in reducing the effect of graph format |
callnumber |
BF1-990 |
title_auth |
Expert interpretation of bar and line graphs: The role of graphicacy in reducing the effect of graph format. |
abstract |
The distinction between informational and computational equivalence of representations, first articulated by Larkin and Simon (1987) has been a fundamental principle in the analysis of diagrammatic reasoning which has been supported empirically on numerous occasions. We present an experiment that investigates this principle in relation to the performance of expert graph users of 2 x 2 'interaction' bar and line graphs. The study sought to determine whether expert interpretation is affected by graph format in the same way that novice interpretations are. The findings revealed that, unlike novices - and contrary to the assumptions of several graph comprehension models - experts' performance was the same for both graph formats, with their interpretation of bar graphs being no worse than that for line graphs. We discuss the implications of the study for guidelines for presenting such data and for models of expert graph comprehension. |
abstractGer |
The distinction between informational and computational equivalence of representations, first articulated by Larkin and Simon (1987) has been a fundamental principle in the analysis of diagrammatic reasoning which has been supported empirically on numerous occasions. We present an experiment that investigates this principle in relation to the performance of expert graph users of 2 x 2 'interaction' bar and line graphs. The study sought to determine whether expert interpretation is affected by graph format in the same way that novice interpretations are. The findings revealed that, unlike novices - and contrary to the assumptions of several graph comprehension models - experts' performance was the same for both graph formats, with their interpretation of bar graphs being no worse than that for line graphs. We discuss the implications of the study for guidelines for presenting such data and for models of expert graph comprehension. |
abstract_unstemmed |
The distinction between informational and computational equivalence of representations, first articulated by Larkin and Simon (1987) has been a fundamental principle in the analysis of diagrammatic reasoning which has been supported empirically on numerous occasions. We present an experiment that investigates this principle in relation to the performance of expert graph users of 2 x 2 'interaction' bar and line graphs. The study sought to determine whether expert interpretation is affected by graph format in the same way that novice interpretations are. The findings revealed that, unlike novices - and contrary to the assumptions of several graph comprehension models - experts' performance was the same for both graph formats, with their interpretation of bar graphs being no worse than that for line graphs. We discuss the implications of the study for guidelines for presenting such data and for models of expert graph comprehension. |
collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_138 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_152 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_250 GBV_ILN_281 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_647 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2086 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 |
title_short |
Expert interpretation of bar and line graphs: The role of graphicacy in reducing the effect of graph format. |
url |
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01673 https://doaj.org/article/10370913a18e48219c4e6c1aa59f4276 http://journal.frontiersin.org/Journal/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01673/full https://doaj.org/toc/1664-1078 |
remote_bool |
true |
author2 |
Nadia eAli |
author2Str |
Nadia eAli |
ppnlink |
631495711 |
callnumber-subject |
BF - Psychology |
mediatype_str_mv |
c |
isOA_txt |
true |
hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
doi_str |
10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01673 |
callnumber-a |
BF1-990 |
up_date |
2024-07-04T00:55:34.891Z |
_version_ |
1803607903979962368 |
fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ044904185</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230502070539.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230227s2015 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01673</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ044904185</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJ10370913a18e48219c4e6c1aa59f4276</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">BF1-990</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">David ePeebles</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Expert interpretation of bar and line graphs: The role of graphicacy in reducing the effect of graph format.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">The distinction between informational and computational equivalence of representations, first articulated by Larkin and Simon (1987) has been a fundamental principle in the analysis of diagrammatic reasoning which has been supported empirically on numerous occasions. We present an experiment that investigates this principle in relation to the performance of expert graph users of 2 x 2 'interaction' bar and line graphs. The study sought to determine whether expert interpretation is affected by graph format in the same way that novice interpretations are. The findings revealed that, unlike novices - and contrary to the assumptions of several graph comprehension models - experts' performance was the same for both graph formats, with their interpretation of bar graphs being no worse than that for line graphs. We discuss the implications of the study for guidelines for presenting such data and for models of expert graph comprehension.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Expertise</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">diagrammatic reasoning</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">spatial reasoning</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">verbal protocols</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Graph comprehension</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Psychology</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Nadia eAli</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Frontiers in Psychology</subfield><subfield code="d">Frontiers Media S.A., 2010</subfield><subfield code="g">6(2015)</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)631495711</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2563826-9</subfield><subfield code="x">16641078</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:6</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01673</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/10370913a18e48219c4e6c1aa59f4276</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://journal.frontiersin.org/Journal/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01673/full</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/1664-1078</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_32</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_90</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_100</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_101</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_138</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_187</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_250</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_281</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_647</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2086</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">6</subfield><subfield code="j">2015</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
score |
7.399205 |