Now let’s arrange the points in a square:
You can almost do it, can’t you? When we split the positional information into two channels – vertical and horizontal – we become more accurate. People can distinguish about 24 or 25 unique locations in a square, or about 4.6 bits of information. We don’t double the bits of accuracy, but this is still a significant improvement.
Now let’s add shading:
Piece of cake isn’t it? You can pick one of 100 dots, check your shoe size, then look back to find the same dot every time. Just by rearranging and coloring, we’ve improved accuracy by an order of magnitude. Now we can clearly distinguish 100 dots, or about 6.65 bits of accuracy.
A practical example
Imagine you are checking the spelling of the word “Mastigoteuthidae” in a printout using one of the lists below.
You’d have to switch your eves between the screen and the paper several times to check the spelling. Which of these three lists would be easier to use?
Ancistrocheiridae | | Ancistrocheiridae | | Ancistrocheiridae |
Architeuthidae | Architeuthidae | Architeuthidae | ||
Bathyteuthidae | Bathyteuthidae | Bathyteuthidae | ||
Batoteuthidae | Batoteuthidae | Batoteuthidae | ||
Brachioteuthidae | Brachioteuthidae | Brachioteuthidae | ||
Chiroteuthidae | Chiroteuthidae | Chiroteuthidae | ||
Chtenopterygidae | Chtenopterygidae | Chtenopterygidae | ||
Cranchiidae | Cranchiidae | Cranchiidae | ||
Cycloteuthidae | Cycloteuthidae | Cycloteuthidae | ||
Enoploteuthidae | Enoploteuthidae | Enoploteuthidae | ||
Gonatidae | Gonatidae | Gonatidae | ||
Histioteuthidae | Histioteuthidae | Histioteuthidae | ||
Joubiniteuthidae | Joubiniteuthidae | Joubiniteuthidae | ||
Lepidoteuthidae | Lepidoteuthidae | Lepidoteuthidae | ||
Lycoteuthidae | Lycoteuthidae | Lycoteuthidae | ||
Magnapinnidae | Magnapinnidae | Magnapinnidae | ||
Mastigoteuthidae | Mastigoteuthidae | Mastigoteuthidae | ||
Neoteuthidae | Neoteuthidae | Neoteuthidae | ||
Octopoteuthidae | Octopoteuthidae | Octopoteuthidae | ||
Ommastrephidae | Ommastrephidae | Ommastrephidae | ||
Onychoteuthidae | Onychoteuthidae | Onychoteuthidae | ||
Pholidoteuthidae | Pholidoteuthidae | Pholidoteuthidae | ||
Promachoteuthidae | Promachoteuthidae | Promachoteuthidae | ||
Psychroteuthidae | Psychroteuthidae | Psychroteuthidae | ||
Pyroteuthidae | Pyroteuthidae | Pyroteuthidae | ||
Thysanoteuthidae | Thysanoteuthidae | Thysanoteuthidae | ||
Walvisteuthidae | Walvisteuthidae | Walvisteuthidae |
List boxes on a computer
So why don’t Microsoft and Apple shade list items in groups of three, or at least make it easier for programmers to do this?
I think they didn’t because of the cases where it wouldn’t be appropriate. For example, you would not want to shade in groups of three when individual list items can wrap for more than one line, or if the list box displays four items or less.
Still, it seems sad to have lost this simple convenience.

I recommend the article The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on our Capacity for Processing Information by George A. Miller. It’s a fascinating paper.
No comments:
Post a Comment