Skip to main content
Log in

Theories of Diagrammatic Reasoning: Distinguishing Component Problems

  • Published:
Minds and Machines Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Theories of diagrams and diagrammatic reasoning typically seek to account for either the formal semantics of diagrams, or for the advantages which diagrammatic representations hold for the reasoner over other forms of representation. Regrettably, almost no theory exists which accounts for both of these issues together, nor how they affect one another. We do not attempt to provide such an account here. We do, however, seek to lay out larger context than is generally used for examining the processes of using diagrams in reasoning or communication. A context in which detailed studies of sub-problems, such as the formal semantics or cognitive impact of specific diagrammatic systems, may be embedded.

Accounts of the embedding of sentential logics in the computational processes of reasoners and communicators are relatively well developed from several decades of research in AI. Analogies between the sentential and the graphical cases are quite revealing about both similarities and differences. To provide a structure for the 'grand context' of diagrammatic representation and reasoning, and to clarify the relations between its component problems, we examine carefully these analogies and the decomposition they provide of subproblems for analysing diagrammatic reasoning.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Gentner, D. (1983), 'Structure-mapping: a theoretical framework for analogy.' Cognitive Science 7:155–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gurr, C. (1998), 'On the Isomorphism, or Lack of it, of Representations', in K. Marriot and B. Meyer, (eds.), Theory of Visual Languages, chapter 10. Berlin: Springer Verlag. 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammer, E. and Danner, N. (1998), 'Towards a Model Theory of Venn Diagrams'. in J. Barwise and C. Allwein, (eds.), Logical Reasoning with Diagrams, New York, Oxford University Press, pp. 109–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shimojima, A. (1996), 'Operational Constraints in Diagrammatic Reasoning'. in J. Barwise and C. Allwein, (eds.), Logical Reasoning with Diagrams, New York, Oxford University Press, pp. 27–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shin, S-i. (1996), 'Situation-theoretic account of Valid Reasoning with Venn Diagrams'. in J. Barwise and C. Allwein, (eds.), Logical Reasoning with Diagrams, New York, Oxford University Press, pp. 81–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stenning, K. and Inder, R. (1995), Applying Semantic Concepts to Analysing Media and Modalities, In J. Glasgow, N. H. Narayan, and B. Chandrasekaran, (eds.), Diagrammatic Reasoning: Cognitive and Computational Perspectives, pp. 303–338. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stenning, K. and Yule, P. (1997) Image and language in Human Reasoning: A Syllogistic Illustration'. Cognitive Psychology, 34(2): 109–159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, D. and Lee, J. (1993), 'Visual reasoning: Its Formal Semantics and Applications'. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing, 4: 327–356.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gurr, C., Lee, J. & Stenning, K. Theories of Diagrammatic Reasoning: Distinguishing Component Problems. Minds and Machines 8, 533–557 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008314528229

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008314528229

Navigation