Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter Mouton November 21, 2014

Iconic semiosis and representational efficiency in the London Underground Diagram

Pedro Atã, Breno Bitarello and João Queiroz
From the journal Cognitive Semiotics

Abstract

The icon is the type of sign connected to efficient representational features, and its manipulation reveals more information about its object. The London Underground Diagram (LUD) is an iconic artifact and a well-known example of representational efficiency, having been copied by urban transportation systems worldwide. This paper investigates the efficiency of the LUD in the light of different conceptions of iconicity. We stress that a specialized representation is an icon of the formal structure of the problem for which it has been specialized. By embedding such rules of action and behavior, the icon acts as a semiotic artifact distributing cognitive effort and participating in niche construction.

References

Atã, P., & J.Queiroz. 2014. Icon and abduction: Situatedness in Peircean cognitive semiotics. In L.Magnani (ed.), Studies in applied philosophy, epistemology and rational ethics 8, model-based reasoning in science and technology, 301313. Berlin & Heidelberg: Springer.10.1007/978-3-642-37428-9_17Search in Google Scholar

Chuah, J., J.Zhang & T. R.Johnson. 2000. The representational effect in complex systems: A distributed representation approach. Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 633638.Search in Google Scholar

Clark, A. 1998. Being there: Putting brain, body, and world together again. Cambridge: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar

Clark, A. 2006a. Language, embodiment, and the cognitive niche. Trends in Cognitive Sciences10(8). 370374.Search in Google Scholar

Clark, A. 2006b. Memento’s revenge: The extended mind, extended. In R.Menary (ed.), Objections and replies to the extended mind, 143. Oxford: Ashgate.10.7551/mitpress/9780262014038.003.0003Search in Google Scholar

Clark, A. 2008. Supersizing the mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195333213.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Clark, A. & D.Chalmers. 1998. The extended mind. Analysis58. 719.10.1093/analys/58.1.7Search in Google Scholar

Garland, K. 1994. Mr. Beck’s underground map. London: Capital Transport Publishing.Search in Google Scholar

Hookway, C. 2002. Truth, rationality, and pragmatism – Themes from Peirce. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/0199256586.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Magnani, L. 2009. Abductive cognition: The epistemological and eco-cognitive dimensions of hypothetical reasoning. Berlin & Heidelberg: Springer.10.1007/978-3-642-03631-6Search in Google Scholar

Peirce, C. S. 1931–1935/1958. The collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, volumes I–VI. C.Hartshorne and P.Weiss, eds. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Peirce, C. S. 1931–1935/1958. The collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, volumes VII–VIII. A. W.Burks, ed. Cambridge & Charlottesville, VA: Harvard University Press & Intelex Corporation.Search in Google Scholar

Queiroz, J. 2012. Complexification. In D.Favareau, P.Cobley & K.Kull (eds.), A more developed signInterpreting the work of Jesper Hoffmeyer, 6770. Tartu: Tartu University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Skagestad, P. 2004. Peirce’s semeiotic model of the mind. In C.Misak (ed.), The Cambridge companion to Peirce, 241246. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CCOL0521570069.010Search in Google Scholar

Spence, R. 2007. Information visualization: Design for interaction. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Search in Google Scholar

Stjernfelt, F. 2007. DiagrammatologyAn investigation on the borderlines of phenomenology, ontology, and semiotics. Heidelberg: Springer.Search in Google Scholar

Stjernfelt, F. 2011. On operational and optimal iconicity in Peirce’s diagrammatology. Semiotica186. 395419.10.1515/semi.2011.061Search in Google Scholar

Walker, J. A. 1979. The London Underground Diagram: A semiotic analysis. Icographic14–15. 24.Search in Google Scholar

Whitby, B. 1996. Multiple knowledge representations: Maps and aeronautical navigation. In D.Peterson (ed.), Forms of representation, 6779. Wiltshire: Intellect Books.Search in Google Scholar

Zhang, J. 1997. Distributed representation as a principle for the analysis of cockpit information displays. The International Journal of Aviation7. 105121.10.1207/s15327108ijap0702_1Search in Google Scholar

Zhang, J. & D. A.Norman. 1994. Representations in distributed cognitive tasks. Cognitive Science18. 87122.10.1207/s15516709cog1801_3Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2014-11-21
Published in Print: 2014-12-1

©2014 by De Gruyter Mouton