Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T23:25:27.222Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Style, but Substance: An Epistemology of Visual versus Numerical Representation in Scientific Practice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Zachary C. Irving
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In practice, scientists must convey data in a “representational style” (e.g., as a numerical array or visual representation). Various authors seek to explain the epistemic role of scientific visual representation in terms of formal conventions (e.g., Goodman, Perini, and Kulvicki). Goodman also tends to dismiss the epistemic relevance of human cognition. My position is that visual conventions are nonarbitrary, in that they play to scientists’ cognitive abilities and limitations. My account draws on Perini's formal analysis, scientific case studies, and empirical literature on global pattern detection in neurotypicals, autistics, and dyslexics.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 78 , Issue 5 , December 2011 , pp. 774 - 787
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

‡

An earlier version of this article was presented to the Cognitive Science of Visual Representation research group at the University of Toronto. I thank the participants of this research group and the audience at the Philosophy of Science Association's biennial meeting for their comments. In particular, I am grateful for discussions with William F. Brewer, Peter Coppin, Francis Dubach, Adam Golding, Laura Perini, and Eric Winsberg. For comments on earlier drafts, I thank Dominic Alford-Dugid, Anjan Chakravartty, Mitchell Gerskup, Ari Gross, Paul Humphreys, Sheisha Kulkarni, Corey Lewis, Greg Lusk, Margaret Morrison, David Neto, Wendy Parker, John Vervaeke, Denis Walsh, and an anonymous reviewer for Philosophy of Science. Sheisha Kulkarni also helped to create the figures in this work. This research was supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

References

American Psychiatric Association. 1994. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 4th ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.Google Scholar
Baron-Cohen, Simon, Bolton, Patrick, Wheelwright, Sally, Scahill, Victoria, Short, Liz, Mead, Genevieve, and Smith, Alex. 1998. “Autism Occurs More Often in Families of Physicists, Engineers, and Mathematicians.” Autism 2:296–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Browning, Keith A. 1964. “Airflow and Precipitation Trajectories within Severe Local Storms Which Travel to the Right of the Winds.” Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences 21:634–39.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byrne, Alex. 2010. “Inverted Qualia.” In Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. Zalta, Edward N.. Stanford, CA: Stanford University, http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2010/entries/qualia-inverted/.Google Scholar
Chase, William G., and Simon, Herbert A.. 1973. “Perception in Chess.” Cognitive Psychology 4:55–81.Google Scholar
Chen, Lin. 2005. “The Topological Approach to Perceptual Organization.” Visual Cognition 12 (4): 553–637.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coppin, Peter W. 2009. “Using Dyslexia to Explore the Cognitive Characteristics of Illustrations and Text: Using Illustrations and Text to Explore the Cognitive Characteristics of Dyslexia.” Paper presented at iConference 2009, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, February, http://nora.lis.uiuc.edu/images/iConferences/coppin.doc.Google Scholar
Evans, M. A., Shedden, J. M., Hevenor, S. J., and Hahn, M. C.. 2000. “The Effect of Variability of Unattended Information on Global and Local Processing: Evidence for Lateralization at Early Stages of Processing.” Neuropsychologia 38 (3): 225–39.Google ScholarPubMed
Everatt, John, Steffert, Beverley, and Smythe, Ian. 1999. “An Eye for the Unusual: Creative Thinking in Dyslexics.” Dyslexia 5 (1): 28–46.3.0.CO;2-K>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fink, Gereon R., Halligan, Peter W., Marshall, John C., Frith, Chris D., Frackowiak, Richard S. J., and Dolan, Raymond J.. 1997. “Neural Mechanisms Involved in the Processing of Global and Local Aspects of Hierarchically Organized Visual Stimuli.” Brain 120:1779–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frege, Gottlob. 1892/1997. “Sinn and Bedeutung.” In The Frege Reader, ed. Beaney, Michael, 151–71. Malden: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Gobet, Fernand, Lane, Peter C. R., Croker, Steve, Cheng, Peter C.-H., Jones, Gary, Oliver, Iain, and Pine, Julian M.. 2001. “Chunking Mechanisms in Human Learning.” Trends in Cognitive Sciences 5 (6): 236–43.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goodman, Nelson. 1960. “The Way the World Is.” Review of Metaphysics 14:48–56.Google Scholar
Goodman, Nelson. 1968. Languages of Art: An Approach to a Theory of Symbols. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill.Google Scholar
Han, Shihui, Weaver, Janelle A., Murray, Scott O., Kang, Xiaojian, Yund, E. William, and Woods, David L.. 2002. “Hemispheric Asymmetry in Global/Local Processing: Effects of Stimulus Position and Spatial Frequency.” NeuroImage 17:1290–99.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Happé, Francesca, and Frith, Uta. 2006. “The Weak Coherence Account: Detail-Focused Cognitive Style in Autism Spectrum Disorders.” Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 36 (1): 5–25.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harrison, Bernard. 1967. “On Describing Colors.” Inquiry 10:38–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Humphreys, Paul. 2004. Extending Ourselves: Computational Science, Empiricism, and Scientific Method. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kulvicki, John. 2010. “Knowing with Images: Medium and Message.” Philosophy of Science 77:295–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larkin, Jill H., and Simon, Herbert A.. 1987. “Why a Diagram Is (Sometimes) Worth Ten Thousand Words.” Cognitive Science 11:65–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Locke, John. 1689/1975. Essay Concerning Human Understanding. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Navon, David. 1977. “Forest before Trees: The Precedence of Global Features in Visual Perception.” Cognitive Psychology 9:353–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perini, Laura. 2005. “The Truth in Pictures.” Philosophy of Science 72 (1): 262–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plaisted, Kate, Swettenham, John, and Rees, Liz. 1999. “Children with Autism Show Local Precedence in a Divided Attention Task and Global Precedence in a Selective Attention Task.” Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 40 (5): 733–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rauschenberger, Robert, and Yantis, Stephen. 2001. “Attentional Capture by Globally Defined Objects.” Perception and Psychophysics 63 (7): 1250–61.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schneps, Matthew H., Rose, L. Todd, and Fisher, Kurt W.. 2007. “Visual Learning and the Brain: Implications for Dyslexia.” Mind, Brain, and Education 1 (3): 128–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
von Karolyi, Catya. 2001. “Visual-Spatial Strength Is Dyslexia: Rapid Discrimination of Impossible Figures.” Journal of Learning Disabilities 34:380–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wilhelmson, Robert B., Jewett, B. F., Shaw, C., Wicker, L. J., Arrott, M., Bushell, C. B., Bajuk, M., Thingvold, J., and Yost, J. B.. 1990. “A Study of the Evolution of a Numerically Modeled Storm.” International Journal of Supercomputer Applications 4 (2): 20–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolff, Urika, and Lundberg, Ingvar. 2002. “The Prevalence of Dyslexia among Art Students.” Dyslexia 8 (1): 34–42.Google ScholarPubMed