Study of the Design Operation of Graphic Simplification

REFERENCES

• Arnheim, R. (1969). Visual thinking. Berkeley: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Arnheim, R. (1974). Art and Visual Perception: A Psychology of the Creative Eye. Berkeley: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Attneave, F. (1954). ‘Some informational aspects of visual perception'. Psychological Review, 61, pp.183–193.
   Google Scholar
• Babbie, E. (2002). The basics of social research. 2nd ed. CA: Wadsworth.
   Google Scholar
• Bell, C. (1913). Art. London: Chatto and Windus.
   Google Scholar
• Biederman, I. (1987). ‘Recognition-by-Components: A Theory of Human Image Understanding'. Psychological Review, 94, pp.115–147.
   Google Scholar
• Biederman, I. (1988). ‘Aspects and extensions of a theory of human image understanding'. In Z. W. Pylyshyn (Ed.), Computational Processes in Human Vision: An Interdisciplinary Perspective (pp.371428). Norwood: NJ: Ablex.
   Google Scholar
• Chan, C. S. (1994). ‘Operational definitions of style’. Environment and Planning B: Planning & Design, 21(2), pp.223–246.
   Google Scholar
• Chuang, M. C., & Shiau, K. A. (1998). ‘A study of style recognition and the operation of products in which Ming-style chairs are used as examples'. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 25(6), pp. 837–848.
   Google Scholar
• Edwards, B. (1986). Drawing on the artist within. New York: Simon & Schuster.
   Google Scholar
• Elam, K. (2001). Grid systems. New York: Princeton Architectural press. Eysenck, M. (ed.). (1998). Psychology: An integrated approach. England: Prentice-Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Eysenck, M., & Keane, M. (2005). Cognitive psychology - a student's handbook. 5th ed. UK: Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fraenkel, J. R. & Wallen, N. E. (2002). How to design and evaluate research in education. New York: Mcgraw-Hill inc.
   Google Scholar
• Goldstein, B. (2002). Sensation and perception. 6th ed. CA: Wadsworth-Thomson Learing.
   Google Scholar
• Gombrich, E. H. (1969). Art and illusion: a study in the psychology of pictorial representation. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gombrich, E. H. (1982). The image & the eye. London: Phaidon Press Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Goodman, N. (1976). Languages of art: an approach to a theory of symbols. 2nd ed. Indianapolis: Hackett.
   Google Scholar
• Goodwin, C. J. (1995). Research in Psychology: Methods and Design. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Gross, M. D. (1996). ‘Elements that Follow Your Rules: Constraint Based CAD Layout'. Paper presented at the Proceedings of Association for Computer Aided Design in Architecture (ACADIA), Tuscon, AZ.
   Google Scholar
• Ho, S.G. (1973). Picasso, Picasso. Taipei: Lion Art Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hoffman, D. D. & Richards, W. (1985). ‘Parts of recognition’. Cognition, 18, pp.65–96.
   Google Scholar
• Hsu, C. C., & Wang, R. (2004). ‘The Use of Digital and Traditional Media in Visual Abstract Methods'. Paper presented at the Regeneration of Digital Art - The International Symposium on Digital Art in Taiwan. Taiwan: Chiao Tung University.
   Google Scholar
• Hsu, C. C., & Wang, R. (2005a). ‘Abstraction in Visual Art and Design: Proposed Redefinition'. Journal of Design, 10(3).
   Google Scholar
• Hsu, C. C., & Wang, R. (2005b). ‘Exploring graphic abstraction methods with interval measurement'. Paper presented at The Perspective of Crossover Design in the Future International Symposium. Taiwan: Chung Yuan University.
   Google Scholar
• Hsu, S. C. (1993). The Aesthetic of Paintings. Taipei: Wu Na Publishing Co., Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Langer, S. K. (1953). Feeling and Form: a theory of art developed from philosophy in a new key. NY: Scribner.
   Google Scholar
• Lin, R. (1992). ‘An application of the semantic differential to icon design'. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Human Factors Society, 36th Annual Meeting.
   Google Scholar
• Lowe, D. (1984). Perceptual organization and visual recognition. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Stanford University, CA.
   Google Scholar
• Marr, D., & Nishihara, H. K. (1978). ‘Representation and recognition of three dimensional shapes'. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B.
   Google Scholar
• Marr, D. (1982). Vision. San Francisco: Freeman.
   Google Scholar
• McBurney, D. H. (2001). Research Methods. CA: Brooks Cole: Pacific Grove.
   Google Scholar
• Meyer, P., & Laveson, I. (1981). ‘An Experience Judgement Approach to Tactical Flight Training'. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Human Factors Society-25th Annual Meeting.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, G. A. (1991). The Science of Words. New York: Freeman.
   Google Scholar
• Modley, R. (1976). Handbook of Pictorial Symbols. New York: Dover Press.
   Google Scholar
• Palmer, S., Rosch, E., and Chase, P. (1981). ‘Canonical perspective and the perception of objects'. In Long, J. B. & Baddeley, A. (Ed.), International Symposium on Attention and Performance (Attention and performance IX) (pp.135–151). N. J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Peterson, I. (1986). ‘Computing art: Can a computer be taught to take a painting's measure?’ Science News, 129(9), pp.138–140.
   Google Scholar
• Roukes, N. (1988), Design Synectics, Stimulating Creativity in Design. Kutztown: Davis Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Rosch, E., Mervis, C. B., Gray, W. D., Johnson, D. M., & Boyes-Braem, P. (1976). ‘Basic objects in natural categories'. Cognitive Psychology, 8, pp.382–439.
   Google Scholar
• Snodgrass, J. G., & Vanderwart, M. (1980). ‘A set of 260 pictures: Norms for naming agreement, image agreement, familiarity and visual complexity'. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 6, pp.174–215.
   Google Scholar
• Wileman, R. E. (1993). Visual Communication. New Jersey: Englewood Cliffs.
   Google Scholar
• Worringer, W. (1953). Abstraction and empathy: a contribution to the psychology of style (Abstraktion und Einfuhlung) (M. Bullock, Trans.). NY: International Universities Press.
   Google Scholar