Visual variable
This article, Visual variable, has recently been created via the Articles for creation process. Please check to see if the reviewer has accidentally left this template after accepting the draft and take appropriate action as necessary.
Reviewer tools: Inform author |
A visual variable, in cartography, graphic design, and data visualization, is an aspect of a graphical object that can visually differentiate it from other objects, and can be controlled during the design process. The concept was first systematized by Jacques Bertin, a French cartographer and graphic designer, and published in his 1967 book, Sémiologie Graphique.[1] Bertin identified a basic set of these variables and provided guidance for their usage; the concept and the set of variables has since been expanded, especially in cartography, where it has become a core principle of education and practice.[2]
History
The concept of variation in certain aspects of graphical objects, especially map symbols, dates back to the early days of cartography as an academic research discipline. In The Look of Maps, (1952) often considered the genesis of American cartographic theory, Arthur Robinson discussed the role of size, shape, and color in establishing contrast in maps.[3] At the same time in France, Jacques Bertin published an early version of his list of visual variables: shape, value, and "sparkling" (grain).[4] Robinson, in his 1960 Elements of Cartography, which quickly became the dominant textbook on the subject, discussed size, shape, color, and pattern as the qualities of map symbols that establish contrast and represent geographic information.[5]
Bertin was a cartographer at the École pratique des hautes études (EPHE) in Paris, where he created maps and graphics for faculty from various disciplines using a wide variety of data. Seeing recurring patterns, he created a system for symbolizing qualitative and quantitative information, apparently inspired by the sciences of semiotics, Human vision, and Gestalt psychology (it is sometimes hard to tell because his early works rarely cite any sources), culminating in Sémiologie Graphique.[4] Despite having a background in cartography, and deriving many of his ideas by evaluating maps, he intended for Sémiologie Graphique to be applied to all forms of graphic design and information visualization. Soon the idea was gaining international acceptance; in 1974 Joel Morrison presented a very similar system in the context of cartographic generalization, citing neither Bertin nor Robinson but saying that it was a "traditional categorization," suggesting its widespread nature by that point.[6]
Bertin was eventually translated into several languages, with the 1983 English edition probably being the most widely read.[7][8] Several terms were proposed for this set of categories, including Bertin's "retinal variables" (used to distinguish them from his two spatial location variables), as well as "Graphic Variables,"[9] "Symbol Dimensions,"[6] and "Primary Graphic Elements," before eventually settling on "Visual Variables," as used almost universally (in English) today.
Bertin has largely been given credit for the system of visual variables; even though he was not the first to mention the idea, Sémiologie Graphique was the first systematic and theoretical treatment, and his overall approach to graphical symbolization is still in use today with only minor modifications. He originally suggested eight variables: location in x and y, size, shape, value, hue, orientation, and grain (pattern spacing). To this list, several additions have been suggested, with a few entering the canonical lists found in textbooks, while location has largely been dropped in cartography (see below). With the rise of multimedia as a cartographic tool, analogous sets of non-visual communication variables have also been presented.
Core visual variables
Starting with Robinson and Bertin, a core set of visual variables has become largely canonical, appearing in cartography and information visualization textbooks, and built into most design software in some form.
Size

The size of a symbol is how much linear or areal space it occupies.[10] This commonly refers to the area of point symbols, and the thickness of line symbols. Size differences are relatively easy to recognize, making it a useful variable to convey information, such as a quantitative amount of something, or relative importance. Studies have shown that humans are better at judging relative differences in linear distance (e.g. one road being twice as thick as another) than relative differences in area (e.g., one circle having twice the area of another). Area differences are generally underestimated, but there is a large variation between people in ability to estimate two-dimensional size.[11] Correctly estimating relative volume has proven even more difficult.
Because geographical features have an actual size on the Earth, this cannot always be controlled, and sometimes works against the wishes of a cartographer; for example, it can be difficult to make a world map in which Russia does not stand out. In a cartogram the size of features is purposefully distorted to represent a variable other than area.
Shape

A shape is a simple design that is used to symbolize an attribute on a map.[12] Shape is most commonly attached to point features in maps. Some shapes are simple in nature and thus are more abstract, while other shapes are more pictorial and are easy for the reader to comprehend what is trying to be conveyed.[13] Some aspects of shape are inherent to the phenomenon and may not be easily manipulable, especially in line and region symbols, such as the shape of a road or a country.[14] However, shape can still play a role in line and region symbols, such as a region filled with tree symbols or an arrowhead on a line. Also, the shape of a feature may be purposefully distorted by Cartographic generalization, especially when creating schematic representations such as many transit maps, although this distortion is rarely used to convey information, only to reduce emphasis on shape and location.
Color: hue
Hue is the visual perceptual property corresponding in humans to the categories called red, green, blue, and others. Maps often use hue to differentiate categories of nominal variables, such as land cover types or geologic layers.[15] Hue is also often used for its psychological connotations, such as red implying heat or danger and blue implying cold or water.
Color: value/lightness

As an aspect of color, value refers to how light or dark an object appears. Value effectively connotes "more" and "less," an ordinal measure; this makes it a very useful form of symbology in thematic maps, especially choropleth maps. Value contributes strongly to Visual hierarchy; elements that contrast most with the value of the background tend to stand out most (e.g., black on a white sheet of paper, white on a black computer screen).
Color: saturation/chroma/intensity

The saturation of a color is its purity or intensity, created by the variety of light composing it; a single wavelength of light is of the highest saturation, while white, black, or gray has no saturation (being an even mixture of all visible wavelengths). Of the three psychological aspects of color, this is the least effective at conveying specific information, but it is very effective at establishing figure-ground and visual hierarchy, with bright colors generally standing out more than muted tones or shades of gray.
Bertin mentions saturation in his discussion of "color" (hue), but did not include it as a distinct variable. However, it has been included in almost all lists since the 1970s[6][9]
Orientation
Orientation refers to the direction labels and symbols are facing on a map (occasionally called "direction" or "angle"). Although it is not used as often as many of the other visual variables, it can be useful for communicating information about the real-world orientation of features. Common examples include wind direction and the direction in which a spring flows.
Pattern/Texture

Although terminology for this aspect still varies somewhat today, texture or pattern in this context generally refers to an aggregate symbol composed of recurring sub-symbols. This can include areas (such as a forest filled with small tree point symbols) and line symbols (such as a railroad with recurring cross-hatches). These sub-symbols can themselves be created by any or all of the above visual variables, but a few variables apply to the overall pattern:
Grain/Spacing
The amount of white space between the sub-symbols in the pattern. Bertin's French term grain was translated as "texture" in the 1983 English edition,[7] and appeared frequently in subsequent lists, but others have suggested that granularity or just grain is a better translation.
Arrangement
The orderliness of the location of the sub-symbols in the pattern, generally either regularly spaced in rows and columns (often indicating a human construction, such as an orchard), or randomly spaced (often indicating a natural distribution). This variable first appears in Morrison's 1974 list[6]
Additional Variables
A number of additional variables have been suggested at times. Some are recent technology-driven proposals, while others are earlier entries that have fallen out of favor.
Position
The absolute location of the symbol in the design, specified as (x,y) coordinates. This was included by Bertin, who distinguished these "imposition variables" from the other "retinal variables." This has largely been dropped from most subsequent lists by cartographers, since location in a map is predetermined by geography. However, it is crucial for representing information in charts and other data visualizations; for example, it is the main method of visualizing quantitative values in a scatterplot. Even in cartography, position becomes a variable when labeling and laying out the non-map elements on the page. It is also relevant when representing fields; for example, the location of an isoline is an abstract visualization of a property, not the location of a real-world linear feature.
Pattern Orientation
In a regular arrangement, the direction in which the sub-symbols are arrayed. Bertin considered this just the area version of the primary variable of orientation, but Morrison included it as a separate variable,[6] because the orientation of the individual sub-symbols may be different than the angle in which they are arranged.
Transparency/opacity

A fairly recent addition, the control of opacity has become common in digital cartography. While it is rarely used to convey specific information, it is common to make features translucent to reduce contrast or to retain underlying information.
Non-visual variables
Following on the widespread usefulness of Bertin's variables, cartographers have proposed analogous sets of controllable variables for animated maps,[16][17] haptic (touch) maps,[18] and even the use of sound in digital maps.[19]
Use in maps
Each of these variables may be employed to convey information, to provide contrast between different features and layers, to establish figure-ground contrast and a clear visual hierarchy, or add to the aesthetic appeal of the map.
Map symbols commonly employ multiple visual variables simultaneously. This can be used to reinforce the depiction of a single property; for example, a capital city having a symbol that is larger and a different shape than other cities, or a color progression on a choropleth map from pale yellow to dark green, using both hue and value. Alternatively, different visual variables may be used to represent different properties; for example, symbols for cities may be differentiated by size to indicate population, and by shape to indicate provincial and national capitals. Some visual variable can be combined harmoniously to make a map clearer and more informative, while other combinations tend to add more confusion than usefulness. For example, early experiments with using Chernoff faces on maps have been criticized as difficult to interpret correctly.[20]
References
- ^ Jacque Bertin, Sémiologie Graphique. Les diagrammes, les réseaux, les cartes. With Marc Barbut [et al.]. Paris : Gauthier-Villars. (Translation 1983. Semiology of Graphics by William J. Berg.)
- ^ Tyner, J. A. (2010). Principles of map design. New York: The Guilford Press.
- ^ Robinson, Arthur, The Look of Maps, University of Wisconsin Press, 1952
- ^ a b Palsky, Gilles (2019) Jacques Bertin, from classical training to systematic thinking of graphic signs, Cartography and Geographic Information Science, 46:2, 189-193, DOI: 10.1080/15230406.2018.1523026
- ^ Robinson, Arthur, Elements of Cartography, Wiley, 1960, p.137
- ^ a b c d e Morrison, Joel, A Theoretical Framework for Cartographic Generalization With Emphasis on the Process of Symbolization, International Yearbook of Cartography, V.14 (1974), p.115
- ^ a b Bertin, Jacques (English trans. William J. Berg), Semiology of Graphics, University of Wisconsin Press, 1983.
- ^ Roth, Robert E. Visual Variables, in D. Richardson, N. Castree, M.F. Goodchild, A. Kobayashki, W. Liu, and R.A. Marston, eds. The International Encyclopedia of Geography, Wiley, 2016. doi:10.1002/9781118786352.wbieg0761
- ^ a b Keates, John S., Cartographic Design and Production, London: Longman, 1973
- ^ Cite error: The named reference
Roth 2016
was invoked but never defined (see the help page). - ^ "Graduated and Proportional Symbol Maps". GEOG 486: Cartography and Visualization. The Pennsylvania State University. Archived from the original on July 2017.
{{cite web}}
: Check date values in:|archivedate=
(help) - ^ "Shape", GIS Dictionary
- ^ Symbol Basics, "Cartographic Symbols"
- ^ "Visual Variables", Westfaelische Wilhelms Universitaet
- ^ https://www.e-education.psu.edu/geog486/node/1864
- ^ DiBiase, D., MacEachren, A. M., Krygier, J. B., & Reeves, C. (1992). Animation and the role of map design in scientific visualization. Cartography and geographic information systems, 19(4), 201–214.
- ^ MacEachren, A. M. (1994). Some truth with maps: A primer on symbolization and design. Association of American Geographers.
- ^ Griffin, A. L. (2001). Feeling it out: the use of haptic visualization for exploratory geographic analysis. Cartographic Perspectives, (39), 12–29. DOI: 10.14714/CP39.636
- ^ Krygier, J. B. (1994). Sound and geographic visualization. In Visualization in Modern Cartography. A. M. MacEachren and D. R. F. Taylor (Eds.). Oxford: Pergamon, pp. 149–166
- ^ Michael D. Lee, Rachel E. Reilly, Marcus E. Butavicius "An empirical evaluation of Chernoff faces, star glyphs, and spatial visualizations for binary data". ACM International Conference Proceeding Series; Vol. 142, Proceedings of the Asia-Pacific symposium on Information visualisation - Volume 24