Lab​ ​Report​ ​#2

Absolute​ ​Judgement

MIE523:​ ​Engineering​ ​Psychology​ ​and​ ​Human​ ​Performance

(October​ ​13,​ ​2017)

Lucas​ ​Arcuri​ ​(Student​ ​Number:​ ​1000788230)

&
Angad​ ​Chadha​ ​(Student​ ​Number:​ ​1000365204)

Abstract
This​ ​report​ ​conveys​ ​the​ ​findings​ ​of​ ​an​ ​experiment​ ​that​ ​used​ ​a​ ​series​ ​of​ ​pitch​ ​absolute​ ​judgment
tasks​ ​to​ ​determine​ ​the​ ​affect​ ​loudness​ ​equalisation​ ​had​ ​on​ ​participant’s​ ​ability​ ​to​ ​distinguish
between​ ​a​ ​set​ ​of​ ​audio​ ​tones​ ​varying​ ​in​ ​frequency.​ ​A​ ​secondary​ ​goal​ ​of​ ​the​ ​experiment​ ​was​ ​to
verify​ ​the​ ​channel​ ​capacity​ ​for​ ​pitch-related​ ​absolute​ ​judgement​ ​tasks.​ ​While​ ​inconclusive​ ​due​ ​to
experimental​ ​limitations​ ​both​ ​hypotheses​ ​were​ ​generally​ ​confirmed.​ ​To​ ​elaborate,​ ​ ​it​ ​was
determined​ ​that​ ​due​ ​to​ ​the​ ​participants​ ​ability​ ​to​ ​judge​ ​each​ ​audio​ ​tone​ ​on​ ​the​ ​basis​ ​of​ ​pitch​ ​and
volume​ ​when​ ​loudness​ ​equalisation​ ​was​ ​disabled,​ ​they​ ​were​ ​able​ ​to​ ​perform​ ​the​ ​tasks​ ​more
effectively.​ ​Furthermore,​ ​contrary​ ​to​ ​expectation,​ ​in​ ​both​ ​the​ ​disabled​ ​and​ ​enabled​ ​cases,​ ​the
data​ ​did​ ​not​ ​exceed​ ​the​ ​2.5-bit​ ​channel​ ​capacity.
Introduction
An​ ​absolute​ ​judgement​ ​task​ ​is​ ​the​ ​action​ ​of​ ​making​ ​a​ ​judgement​ ​about​ ​a​ ​stimulus​ ​based​ ​on​ ​a
single​ ​trait​ ​or​ ​dimension.​ ​Absolute​ ​judgement​ ​tasks​ ​often​ ​require​ ​the​ ​user​ ​to​ ​distinguish​ ​a
stimulus​ ​along​ ​a​ ​continuum​ ​that​ ​has​ ​three​ ​or​ ​more​ ​options​ ​[1].​ ​Absolute​ ​judgment​ ​also​ ​has​ ​its
applications​ ​in​ ​what​ ​George​ ​A.​ ​Miller​ ​calls​ T ​ he​ ​Magical​ ​Number​ ​Seven,​ ​Plus​ ​or​ ​Minus​ ​Two​ [​ 2]
which​ ​can​ ​be​ ​interpreted​ ​as​ ​the​ ​range​ ​of​ ​information​ ​the​ ​average​ ​human​ ​can​ ​hold​ ​in​ ​their
working​ ​memory.​ ​Therefore​ ​in​ ​an​ ​absolute​ ​judgement​ ​task,​ ​on​ ​average,​ ​a​ ​subject​ ​can
accurately​ ​distinguish​ ​stimuli​ ​if​ ​the​ ​number​ ​of​ ​options​ ​falls​ ​within​ ​this​ ​7 ± 2​ ​range.

In​ ​the​ ​realm​ ​of​ ​information​ ​theory,​ ​studies​ ​have​ ​found​ ​that​ ​certain​ ​stimulus​ ​dimensions
(brightness,​ ​loudness​ ​etc..)​ ​have​ ​varying​ ​channel​ ​capacities​ ​[3],​ ​which​ ​similar​ ​to​ ​7 ± 2​ ​range,​ ​are
measures​ ​of​ ​the​ ​amount​ ​of​ ​information​ ​in​ ​bits​ ​that​ ​can​ ​be​ ​reliably​ ​transmitted​ ​through​ ​a​ ​certain
channel.​ ​This​ ​experiment​ ​will​ ​investigate​ ​the​ ​channel​ ​capacity​ ​of​ ​a​ ​pitch​ ​absolute​ ​judgement
task​ ​while​ ​also​ ​determining​ ​if​ ​loudness​ ​equalisation​ ​effects​ ​the​ ​upper​ ​limit​ ​of​ ​a​ ​subjects​ ​channel
capacity.

Hypothesis​ ​Formation
Loudness​ ​equalisation​ ​is​ ​used​ ​to​ ​combat​ ​the​ ​impression​ ​that​ ​higher​ ​frequencies​ ​appear​ ​louder
to​ ​the​ ​human​ ​ear.​ ​This​ ​is​ ​achieved​ ​by​ ​adjusting​ ​the​ ​amplitude​ ​of​ ​certain​ ​frequencies​ ​such​ ​that
lower​ ​frequencies​ ​are​ ​easier​ ​to​ ​hear​ ​and​ ​higher​ ​frequencies​ ​are​ ​less​ ​loud​ ​[4].​ ​In​ ​a​ ​pitch​ ​absolute
judgement​ ​task,​ ​loudness​ ​equalisation​ ​is​ ​integral​ ​to​ ​ensuring​ ​the​ ​subject​ ​uses​ ​only​ ​the​ ​pitch​ ​of
the​ ​audio​ ​stimuli,​ ​not​ ​the​ ​loudness.​ ​Therefore​ ​without​ ​loudness​ ​equalisation​ ​a​ ​subject​ ​would​ ​be
able​ ​to​ ​more​ ​easily​ ​distinguish​ ​between​ ​frequencies​ ​because​ ​there​ ​exist​ ​two​ ​dimensions​ ​on
which​ ​to​ ​judge​ ​a​ ​stimulus.​ ​As​ ​a​ ​result​ ​we​ ​expect​ ​the​ ​channel​ ​capacity​ ​of​ ​an​ ​absolute​ ​judgement
task​ ​to​ ​be​ ​higher​ ​without​ ​loudness​ ​equalisation.

As​ ​seen​ ​in​ ​Figure​ ​1,​ ​a​ ​secondary​ ​goal​ ​of​ ​the​ ​experiment​ ​is​ ​to​ ​affirm​ ​the​ ​proportionality​ ​between
the​ ​input​ ​information​ ​H(s),​ ​and​ ​the​ ​transmitted​ ​information​ ​H(t)​ ​of​ ​a​ ​pitch​ ​absolute​ ​judgement
task.​ ​We​ ​are​ ​particularly​ ​interested​ ​in​ ​verifying​ ​the​ ​findings​ ​of​ ​Pollack​ ​that​ ​suggest​ ​an
asymptotic​ ​performance​ ​limit​ ​at​ ​channel​ ​capacity​ ​[5].​ ​We​ ​also​ ​will​ ​attempt​ ​to​ ​verify​ ​that​ ​the
channel​ ​capacity​ ​with​ ​loudness​ ​equalisation​ ​occurs​ ​at​ ​2.5​ ​bits​ ​of​ ​transmitted​ ​information​ ​and
that​ ​information​ ​transmission​ ​increases​ ​but​ ​at​ ​a​ ​gradually​ ​decreasing​ ​rate​ ​[3].
Figure​ ​1-​ ​An​ ​example​ ​of​ ​the​ ​asymptotic​ ​performance​ ​limit​ ​near​ ​2.5​ ​bits​ ​from​ ​data​ ​collected​ ​by
Pollack​ ​[5].

Method
Using​ ​the​ ​software​ ​provided,​ ​participants​ ​were​ ​asked​ ​to​ ​identify​ ​a​ ​set​ ​of​ ​tones​ ​to​ ​the​ ​best​ ​of
their​ ​ability.​ ​During​ ​each​ ​trial,​ ​the​ ​range​ ​of​ ​tones​ ​varied​ ​based​ ​on​ ​the​ ​amount​ ​tones​ ​in​ ​each​ ​set.
For​ ​example,​ ​a​ ​4​ ​tone​ ​trial​ ​would​ ​present​ ​the​ ​participant​ ​with​ ​tones​ ​at​ ​the​ ​following​ ​frequencies:
50​ ​Hz,​ ​100​ ​Hz,​ ​150​ ​Hz,​ ​200​ ​Hz.​ ​As​ ​per​ ​the​ ​example,​ ​regardless​ ​of​ ​the​ ​number​ ​of​ ​tones​ ​in​ ​each
trial,​ ​the​ ​lowest​ ​frequency​ ​tested​ ​was​ ​50Hz​ ​and​ ​subsequent​ ​frequencies​ ​would​ ​increase​ ​by
50Hz.

Each​ ​trial​ ​commenced​ ​with​ ​a​ ​mandatory​ ​learning​ ​phase​ ​where​ ​each​ ​tone​ ​would​ ​be​ ​assigned​ ​a
number.​ ​Participants​ ​were​ ​asked​ ​to​ ​listen​ ​to​ ​each​ ​tone​ ​and​ ​remember​ ​the​ ​number​ ​to​ ​which​ ​it
was​ ​associated.​ ​The​ ​assigned​ ​number​ ​increased​ ​with​ ​frequency​ ​(eg.​ ​1-50​ ​Hz,​ ​2-100​ ​Hz,​ ​3-150
Hz,​ ​4-200​ ​Hz).​ ​Participants​ ​were​ ​permitted​ ​to​ ​listen​ ​to​ ​the​ ​tones​ ​twice​ ​either​ ​by​ ​replaying​ ​the​ ​set
or​ ​listening​ ​to​ ​individual​ ​tones​ ​of​ ​their​ ​choosing.

In​ ​the​ ​experiment​ ​phase,​ ​participants​ ​were​ ​presented​ ​a​ ​set​ ​of​ ​tones​ ​in​ ​random​ ​order​ ​with​ ​each
frequency​ ​presented​ ​3​ ​times.​ ​This​ ​ensured​ ​that​ ​regardless​ ​of​ ​the​ ​number​ ​of​ ​tones​ ​presented​ ​the
experiment​ ​time​ ​would​ ​be​ ​relatively​ ​short​ ​so​ ​as​ ​not​ ​to​ ​overwork​ ​the​ ​memory​ ​of​ ​the​ ​participant.
Necessitating​ ​each​ ​tone​ ​be​ ​presented​ ​3​ ​times​ ​also​ ​limited​ ​the​ ​presence​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Bow​ ​Effect​ ​which
states​ ​that​ ​less​ ​accurate​ ​performance​ ​is​ ​elicited​ ​at​ ​the​ ​centre​ ​of​ ​a​ ​stimulus-set​ ​range​ ​[1].​ ​Taking
this​ ​into​ ​account,​ ​an​ ​experimental​ ​design​ ​with​ ​randomly​ ​presented​ ​tones​ ​would​ ​yield​ ​the
possibility​ ​that​ ​centre​ ​range​ ​tones​ ​would​ ​be​ ​presented​ ​more​ ​frequently,​ ​potentially​ ​skewing​ ​the
results.​ ​Participants​ ​were​ ​required​ ​to​ ​respond​ ​to​ ​each​ ​tone​ ​by​ ​selecting​ ​the​ ​number​ ​assigned​ ​to
it​ ​from​ ​the​ ​learning​ ​phase.​ ​The​ ​number​ ​of​ ​tones​ ​in​ ​each​ ​trial​ ​was​ ​determined​ ​randomly​ ​in​ ​order
to​ ​limit​ ​the​ ​participant’s​ ​capacity​ ​for​ ​improvement.​ ​The​ ​trials​ ​were​ ​conducted​ ​in​ ​two​ ​blocks​ ​of​ ​10,
with​ ​and​ ​without​ ​loudness​ ​equalisation.

Results
The​ ​data​ ​presented​ ​below​ ​represents​ ​aggregated​ ​data​ ​from​ ​two​ ​participants​ ​for​ ​the​ ​trial
blocks​ ​with​ ​and​ ​without​ ​loudness​ ​equalisation​ ​(see​ ​Appendix​ ​B​ ​for​ ​individual​ ​data).​ ​The
graph​ ​in​ ​Figure​ ​2​ ​below​ ​plots​ ​H(s),​ ​the​ ​information​ ​(in​ ​bits)​ ​present​ ​in​ ​the​ ​stimulus​ ​set
against​ ​H(t),​ ​the​ ​information​ ​(in​ ​bits)​ ​transmitted​ ​by​ ​the​ ​participants.​ ​The​ ​formulae​ ​for
these​ ​values​ ​can​ ​be​ ​found​ ​in​ ​Appendix​ ​A​ ​as​ ​well​ ​an​ ​example​ ​of​ ​a​ ​stimulus-response
matrix​ ​that​ ​was​ ​employed​ ​as​ ​a​ ​tool​ ​to​ ​organize​ ​the​ ​collected​ ​data.​ ​The​ ​H(t)​ ​values
generated​ ​from​ ​each​ ​individual​ ​matrix​ ​were​ ​averaged​ ​to​ ​arrive​ ​at​ ​each​ ​data​ ​point.​ ​The
graph​ ​also​ ​contains​ ​a​ ​line​ ​for​ ​perfect​ ​performance​ ​(H(s)​ ​=​ ​H(t))​ ​representing​ ​100%
information​ ​transmission​ ​and​ ​a​ ​line​ ​for​ ​the​ ​pitch​ ​channel​ ​capacity​ ​of​ ​2.5​ ​bits.
The​ ​results​ ​of​ ​the​ ​experiment​ ​show​ ​that​ ​as​ ​the​ ​participants​ ​were​ ​presented​ ​an
increasing​ ​amount​ ​of​ ​tones,​ ​represented​ ​by​ ​H(s),​ ​more​ ​information​ ​was​ ​transmitted.
Furthermore,​ ​despite​ ​a​ ​few​ ​anomalies,​ ​generally,​ ​when​ ​loudness​ ​equalisation​ ​was
disabled,​ ​participants​ ​could​ ​distinguish​ ​the​ ​audio​ ​tones​ ​at​ ​a​ ​greater​ ​rate.​ ​This​ ​is
especially​ ​apparent​ ​when​ ​looking​ ​at​ ​the​ ​point​ ​in​ ​which​ ​each​ ​line​ ​veers​ ​from​ ​perfect
performance.​ ​With​ ​loudness​ ​equalisation,​ ​this​ ​occurs​ ​just​ ​past​ ​H(s)​ ​=​ ​1.5​ ​bits.​ ​Without
loudness​ ​equalisation,​ ​this​ ​occurs​ ​around​ ​H(s)​ ​=​ ​2.3,​ ​representing​ ​a​ ​difference​ ​of
approximately​ ​0.8​ ​bits.

Although​ ​inconclusively​ ​due​ ​to​ ​sample​ ​size,​ ​the​ ​data​ ​confirms​ ​that​ ​2.5-bit​ ​channel
capacity​ ​is​ ​not​ ​breached​ ​for​ ​pitch​ ​absolute​ ​judgement​ ​tasks.​ ​However,​ ​contrary​ ​to
Pollack’s​ ​findings,​ ​as​ ​H(s)​ ​increases,​ ​there​ ​is​ ​no​ ​evidence​ ​of​ ​asymptotic​ ​performance
near​ ​channel​ ​capacity.​ ​Rather,​ ​in​ ​the​ ​case​ ​when​ ​loudness​ ​equalisation​ ​is​ ​enabled,​ ​the
data​ ​simply​ ​increases​ ​at​ ​lesser​ ​rate​ ​towards​ ​channel​ ​capacity.​ ​In​ ​the​ ​disabled​ ​condition,
the​ ​data​ ​fluctuates​ ​violently​ ​leading​ ​to​ ​less​ ​definitive​ ​conclusions​ ​about​ ​the​ ​presence​ ​of
asymptotic​ ​performance.
Figure​ ​2​ ​-​ ​Data​ ​depicting​ ​the​ ​results​ ​of​ ​the​ ​absolute​ ​judgment​ ​tasks​ ​for​ ​pitch.

Discussion
Based​ ​on​ ​the​ ​results​ ​of​ ​this​ ​experiment​ ​the​ ​data​ ​generally​ ​support​ ​the​ ​hypothesis​ ​that
participants​ ​are​ ​able​ ​to​ ​better​ ​perform​ ​pitch​ ​absolute​ ​judgement​ ​tasks​ ​when​ ​loudness
equalisation​ ​is​ ​disabled.​ ​The​ ​findings​ ​also​ ​affirm​ ​that​ ​the​ ​2.5-bit​ ​channel​ ​capacity​ ​acts
as​ ​a​ ​limit​ ​to​ ​pitch​ ​absolute​ ​judgement​ ​tasks.​ ​However,​ ​it​ ​was​ ​inconclusive​ ​that​ ​as​ ​H(s)
increases,​ ​participant​ ​performance​ ​approaches​ ​this​ ​limit​ ​asymptotically.​ ​Figure​ ​2​ ​also
supports​ ​the​ ​hypothesis​ ​that​ ​for​ ​a​ ​pitch​ ​absolute​ ​judgement​ ​task,​ ​the​ ​information
present​ ​in​ ​the​ ​stimuli​ ​is​ ​directly​ ​proportional​ ​to​ ​the​ ​information​ ​transmitted.

We​ ​are​ ​able​ ​to​ ​confirm​ ​the​ ​first​ ​hypothesis​ ​because​ ​performance​ ​when​ ​loudness
equalisation​ ​was​ ​disabled,​ ​performance​ ​improved,​ ​as​ ​evident​ ​by​ ​higher​ ​H(t)​ ​values.​ ​It​ ​is
difficult​ ​to​ ​comment​ ​on​ ​the​ ​exception​ ​occurring​ ​at​ ​H(s)​ ​=​ ​3.32​ ​and​ ​although​ ​it​ ​is​ ​contrary
to​ ​the​ ​conclusion​ ​stated,​ ​we​ ​suspect​ ​this​ ​result​ ​is​ ​due​ ​to​ ​the​ ​lack​ ​of​ ​a​ ​statistically
significant​ ​sample​ ​size​ ​and​ ​therefore​ ​can​ ​be​ ​dismissed​ ​as​ ​an​ ​outlier.​ ​Overall,​ ​the
improved​ ​performance​ ​can​ ​be​ ​attributed​ ​to​ ​the​ ​fact​ ​that​ ​with​ ​loudness​ ​equalisation
disabled,​ ​participants​ ​could​ ​use​ ​both​ ​the​ ​pitch​ ​and​ ​volume​ ​of​ ​the​ ​tone​ ​to​ ​determine​ ​its
assigned​ ​number.​ ​The​ ​process​ ​by​ ​which​ ​the​ ​results​ ​were​ ​collected​ ​did​ ​not​ ​account​ ​for
the​ ​presence​ ​of​ ​more​ ​information​ ​in​ ​the​ ​disabled​ ​case,​ ​therefore​ ​there​ ​was​ ​an​ ​inherent
difference​ ​in​ ​the​ ​H(s)​ ​values​ ​used​ ​between​ ​conditions​ ​in​ ​this​ ​experiment.​ ​Had​ ​this​ ​been
accounted​ ​for,​ ​the​ ​disabled​ ​data​ ​likely​ ​would​ ​have​ ​been​ ​flatter.

With​ ​all​ ​data​ ​values​ ​appearing​ ​under​ ​the​ ​H(t)​ ​=​ ​2.5-bit​ ​channel​ ​capacity​ ​the​ ​experiment
affirmed​ ​that​ ​this​ ​acts​ ​as​ ​a​ ​limit​ ​to​ ​the​ ​amount​ ​of​ ​information​ ​that​ ​can​ ​be​ ​transmitted.​ ​It
is​ ​interesting​ ​that​ ​despite​ ​having​ ​effectively​ ​two​ ​dimensions​ ​on​ ​which​ ​to​ ​judge​ ​the​ ​audio
stimuli​ ​in​ ​the​ ​disabled​ ​case,​ ​the​ ​data​ ​does​ ​not​ ​exceed​ ​the​ ​channel​ ​capacity.​ ​We​ ​suspect
that​ ​had​ ​the​ ​experiment​ ​been​ ​designed​ ​such​ ​that​ ​the​ ​tone​ ​frequencies​ ​were​ ​spaced
further​ ​than​ ​50Hz​ ​the​ ​effects​ ​of​ ​loudness​ ​equalisation​ ​would​ ​have​ ​been​ ​more
pronounced.

Conclusions
The​ ​experiment​ ​conducted​ ​in​ ​this​ ​lab​ ​attempted​ ​to​ ​investigate​ ​the​ ​effects​ ​of​ ​loudness
equalisation​ ​for​ ​pitch​ ​absolute​ ​judgement​ ​tasks.​ ​It​ ​affirmed​ ​the​ ​hypothesis​ ​that​ ​disabling
loudness​ ​equalisation​ ​allowed​ ​for​ ​more​ ​information​ ​to​ ​be​ ​presented​ ​in​ ​the​ ​stimuli​ ​leading​ ​to
improved​ ​performance​ ​when​ ​compared​ ​to​ ​the​ ​enabled​ ​case.​ ​In​ ​both​ ​cases,​ ​the​ ​2.5-bit​ ​channel
capacity​ ​was​ ​not​ ​exceeded​ ​cohering​ ​to​ ​Miller’s​ ​7 ± 2​ ​empirically​ ​observed​ ​“magical”​ ​range.
Unlike​ ​Pollack’s​ ​findings​ ​that​ ​saw​ ​asymptotic​ ​performance​ ​approaching​ ​the​ ​channel​ ​capacity,
the​ ​findings​ ​only​ ​show​ ​a​ ​decreased​ ​rate​ ​of​ ​information​ ​transmission​ ​as​ ​more​ ​information​ ​is
presented.

Limitations
For​ ​reasons​ ​explained​ ​above​ ​the​ ​experiment​ ​necessitated​ ​that​ ​trials​ ​would​ ​present​ ​each​ ​tone​ ​3
times​ ​in​ ​random​ ​order.​ ​However,​ ​an​ ​astute​ ​participant​ ​would​ ​be​ ​able​ ​to​ ​simultaneously​ ​while
performing​ ​the​ ​instructed​ ​task,​ ​remember​ ​the​ ​quantity​ ​of​ ​certains​ ​tones​ ​previously​ ​presented.
This​ ​would​ ​effectively​ ​allow​ ​them​ ​to​ ​“rule​ ​out”​ ​which​ ​tones​ ​would​ ​not​ ​be​ ​presented​ ​again.​ ​This
would​ ​be​ ​especially​ ​prevalent​ ​for​ ​trials​ ​with​ ​5​ ​tones​ ​or​ ​fewer​ ​as​ ​it​ ​would​ ​be​ ​easier​ ​to​ ​remember
which​ ​tones​ ​were​ ​presented.

Another​ ​limitation​ ​of​ ​the​ ​experiment​ ​was​ ​due​ ​to​ ​the​ ​apparatus​ ​used.​ ​In​ ​an​ ​effort​ ​to​ ​concurrently
perform​ ​the​ ​trial​ ​blocks.​ ​The​ ​two​ ​participants​ ​did​ ​not​ ​use​ ​the​ ​same​ ​hearing​ ​devices.​ ​This​ ​was
further​ ​compacted​ ​by​ ​the​ ​fact​ ​that​ ​the​ ​two​ ​devices​ ​differed​ ​significantly​ ​in​ ​quality​ ​and​ ​type
(Sennheiser​ ​HD​ ​598​ ​Cs​ ​Over​ ​Ear​ ​Headphones,​ ​Sony​ ​standard​ ​ear​ ​bud).

Lastly,​ ​the​ ​external​ ​environment​ ​during​ ​which​ ​the​ ​experiment​ ​took​ ​place​ ​was​ ​noisy​ ​and​ ​was
conducive​ ​to​ ​distractions​ ​potentially​ ​affecting​ ​the​ ​participant’s​ ​effectiveness​ ​in​ ​conducting​ ​the
experiment.
Implications
The​ ​results​ ​of​ ​this​ ​report​ ​highlight​ ​the​ ​limitations​ ​of​ ​absolute​ ​judgement​ ​tasks.​ ​Designers​ ​of
information​ ​sources​ ​must​ ​be​ ​particularly​ ​aware​ ​of​ ​these​ ​limitations​ ​at​ ​the​ ​risk​ ​of​ ​frustrating​ ​their
readers.​ ​For​ ​example,​ ​take​ ​a​ ​colour​ ​coded​ ​map​ ​and​ ​corresponding​ ​legend.​ ​The​ ​legend​ ​is
similar​ ​to​ ​the​ ​learning​ ​phase​ ​of​ ​this​ ​experiment​ ​because​ ​it​ ​allows​ ​the​ ​reader​ ​to​ ​assign​ ​colours​ ​to
certain​ ​values​ ​when​ ​viewing​ ​the​ ​map,​ ​much​ ​like​ ​assigning​ ​tones​ ​to​ ​numbers.​ ​However,​ ​if​ ​the
map​ ​designer​ ​employs​ ​too​ ​many​ ​colours,​ ​the​ ​reader​ ​will​ ​likely​ ​be​ ​unable​ ​to​ ​remember​ ​the
colours​ ​and​ ​their​ ​associated​ ​values​ ​and​ ​thus​ ​will​ ​be​ ​forced​ ​to​ ​look​ ​back​ ​and​ ​forth​ ​between​ ​the
map​ ​and​ ​legend.​ ​This​ ​is​ ​more​ ​time​ ​consuming​ ​and​ ​can​ ​potentially​ ​lead​ ​to​ ​frustration.

An​ ​example​ ​of​ ​a​ ​poorly​ ​designed​ ​map​ ​is​ ​seen​ ​in​ ​Figure​ ​3.​ ​The​ ​map​ ​designer​ ​has​ ​overloaded
the​ ​reader’s​ ​working​ ​memory​ ​by​ ​using​ ​too​ ​many​ ​colours​ ​and​ ​does​ ​not​ ​rely​ ​on​ ​the​ ​use​ ​of​ ​shade
as​ ​the​ ​percentage​ ​increases​ ​or​ ​decreases.

Figure​ ​3​ ​-​ ​An​ ​example​ ​of​ ​a​ ​poorly​ ​designed​ ​map.​ ​[7]
References

​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​[1]​ ​A.​ ​ ​Yee,​ ​'Information​ ​theoretic​ ​models​ ​-​ ​ ​Part​ ​3',​ ​Toronto,​ ​2017.

[2]​ ​G.​ ​Miller,​ ​"The​ ​magical​ ​number​ ​seven,​ ​plus​ ​or​ ​minus​ ​two:​ ​Some​ ​limits​ ​on​ ​our​ ​capacity
for​ ​processing​ ​information.",​ ​Psychological​ ​Review​,​ ​vol.​ ​101,​ ​no.​ ​2,​ ​pp.​ ​343-352,​ ​1994.

[3]​ ​W.N.​ ​Dember,​ ​J.S.​ ​Warm,​ ​"Psychology​ ​of​ ​Perception."​ ​NY:Holt,​ ​Rinehart​ ​&​ ​Winston
1979.

[4]M.​ ​Pinola,​ ​Lifehacker.com​,​ ​2017.​ ​[Online].​ ​Available:

https://lifehacker.com/5986236/normalize-the-sound-volume-on-your-pc-with-windows-
loudness-equalization-setting.​ ​[Accessed:​ ​9-​ ​Oct-​ ​2017].

[5]I.​ ​Pollack,​ ​"The​ ​Information​ ​of​ ​Elementary​ ​Auditory​ ​Displays.​ ​II",​ T ​ he​ ​Journal​ ​of​ ​the
Acoustical​ ​Society​ ​of​ ​America​,​ ​vol.​ ​25,​ ​no.​ ​4,​ ​pp.​ ​765-769,​ ​1953.

[6]​ ​The​ ​world​ ​factbook​ ​2009​.​ ​Washington,​ ​D.C.:​ ​Central​ ​Intelligence​ ​Agency,​ ​2009.
 Appendix​ ​A
Calculations

H(t)​ ​was​ ​calculated​ ​using​ ​the​ ​formula:

H(t)​ ​=​ ​H(S)​ ​+​ ​H(R)​ ​-​ ​H(S,R)
Where,

​​
The​ ​calculations​ ​for​ ​H(t)​ ​for​ ​each​ ​experiment​ ​was​ ​done​ ​using​ ​the​ ​stimulus-response​ ​matrix​ ​(see
below).​ ​The​ ​stimulus​ ​-​ ​response​ ​matrix​ ​was​ ​filled​ ​by​ ​probabilities​ ​of​ ​every​ ​stimulus-response
combination​ ​possible​ ​for​ ​every​ ​experiment​ ​to​ ​use​ ​the​ ​formulas​ ​shown​ ​above.​ ​The​ ​probabilities
were​ ​estimated​ ​by​ ​counting​ ​the​ ​number​ ​of​ ​times​ ​the​ ​participants​ ​had​ ​pressed​ ​that
corresponding​ ​ ​response​ ​key​ ​for​ ​a​ ​respective​ ​stimulus​ ​presented​ ​on​ ​screen​ ​(frequency)​ ​and
dividing​ ​that​ ​number​ ​by​ ​the​ ​total​ ​number​ ​of​ ​responses​ ​for​ ​each​ ​experiment.

Figure​ ​4:​ ​Example​ ​of​ ​a​ ​stimulus-response​ ​matrix​ ​tool​ ​used​ ​to​ ​calculate​ ​the​ ​information
values​ ​for​ ​a​ ​4-stimuli​ ​set.
 Appendix​ ​B

Figure​ ​5:​ ​Participant​ ​1​ ​Individual​ ​Performance​ ​for​ ​both​ ​conditions

Figure​ ​6:​ ​Participant​ ​2​ ​Individual​ ​performance​ ​for​ ​both​ ​conditions