In a recent Aesthetics & Astronomy study, an online survey and focus groups were used to explore whether mobile platforms affect perception of astronomy images. In the online study, participants on their mobile devices were randomly assigned to view astronomy images. Two focus groups were also conducted with experts and non-expert volunteers. Both groups were presented with deep space images across platforms- a large projection screen, an iPad, and an iPhone. Although this was part of a larger study, we report here just on the mobile platform. Results indicated that there was support for Smith & Smith's 2001 concept of facsimile accommodation in that, as might be expected, bigger was better except in the absence of a comparison, where participants adapted to the platform size. The results raise questions as to both size and quality of images on mobile platforms in a rapidly changing technological world.

1. Examining perceptions of astronomy images across
mobile platforms: Does This iPad Make My Asteroid Look Fat?
Arcand, K.K. (SAO); Watzke, M (SAO); Smith, L.F. (Univ. Otago); Smith, J.K. (Univ. of Otago); Smith, R.K (SAO); Bookbinder, J (SAO)
Background Images of the cosmos provide snapshots of
various phases of life and death, different physical phenomena,
found in locations across the known Universe. Today, some
400 years after Galileo created his, modern telescopes have
enabled us to “see” what the human eye cannot. This new
generation of ground- and space-based telescopes has created
an explosion of images for experts and non-experts to explore.
The Aesthetics & Astronomy project studies the perception
of multi-wavelength astronomical imagery and the effects
http://astroart.cfa.harvard.edu
Details of Research
The Aesthetics & Astronomy (A&A) team consists of a unique combination of professional
astronomy communicators, astrophysicists, and aesthetics experts from the discipline
Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory (SAO) authors:
of psychology, or whom a major goal is to explore how best to convey scientific information
60 Garden Street, Cambridge, MA 02138 USA
with non-expert audiences. In this study, funded by the Smithsonian Institution Scholarly
Studies Program, an online survey and two focus groups were used to explore whether
Phone: 617.218.7196
mobile platforms affect perception of astronomy images.
kkowal@cfa.harvard.edu Twitter: @kimberlykowal (Kimberly K. Arcand)
mwatzke@cfa.harvard.edu (Megan Watzke)
The online study, conducted in December of 2010, resulted in 2,384 usable responses,
rsmith@cfa.harvard.edu (Randall K. Smith)
in which participants on their mobile devices were randomly assigned to view 1 of 12
astronomy images. We collected demographic data, information about the type of mobile
jbookbinder@cfa.harvard.edu (Jay Bookbinder)
at the image. Additionally, two focus groups were conducted, one with 12 experts
Contact information for University of Otago authors:
device, reactions to the image shown, and viewing latencies for how long viewers looked
(astrophysicists/astronomers) and one with 10 non-expert volunteers from the public.
University of Otago – College of Education
of the scientific and artistic choices in processing astronomical
data. The images come from a variety of space and ground-
based observatories, including NASA’s Chandra X-ray Observatory,
Hubble Space Telescope, Spitzer Space Telescope, the Solar
Dynamics Observatory, the Very Large Array, and many others.
Evaluation of such data can benefit astronomy across the
electromagnetic spectrum of astronomical images, and may
145 Union Street, East Dunedin, 9054, New Zealand
Both experts and non-experts were presented
Summary of fascimile
with 3 deep space images across 3 platforms:
(Smith & Smith, 2001):
Jeffrey.smith@otago.ac.nz (Jeffrey K. Smith)
accommodation
a large projection screen, an iPad, and a small
Participants are
mobile device (e.g., an iPhone). Although this
the limitations of the
able to `look past’
selected medium.
was part of a larger study, we report here just
Error bar chart of responses to “How much do
When participants
you like this image?” by the image presented.
looked, for example,
on the mobile platform.
Circle represents mean response, and bars
on a small smart
help visualization of data in other scientific disciplines.
phone screen, they
represent 95% confidence interval for the mean.
accommodated to
Results indicated that there was support for Smith
Aesthetics from a psychological
perspective is the study of all things
beautiful whether art or not, and all
things art whether beautiful or not.
lisa.smith@otago.ac.nz (Lisa F. Smith)
the screen image
& Smith’s (2001) concept of facsimile accommodation
and focused their
in that, as might be expected, bigger was better
astronomy image.
attention on the
Smith & Smith
except in the absence of a comparison, where
speculate that people
participants adapted to the platform size. The
adjust to the limitations
results raise questions as to both size and quality
are viewing and
of the facsimile they
Error bar chart of responses to “How well could
concentrate on the
of images on mobile platforms in a rapidly changing
you explain this image to another person?” by
information in
the image presented. Circle represents mean
the image.
technological world.
response, and bars represent 95% confidence
Research questions for Aesthetics & Astronomy
include:
Findings
- ow much do variations in presentation
H
of color, explanation, and scale affect
comprehension of astronomical images?
- hat are the differences between various
W
populations (experts, novices, students) in
terms of what they learn from the images?
- hat misconceptions do the non-experts
W
have about astronomy and the images they
are exposed to?
demonstrate a need for strong narrative and
textual context when presenting science images,
for explicit discussion of the colors and what
they represent in science images, and for a
clear sense of physical scale that is helpful for
comprehension, across all levels of expertise
(Arcand, et al., 2010; Smith, et al., 2010).
2
3
A multivariate analysis of variance was conducted to see if there were significant differences
in ratings for the two questions: (1) How much did you like this image? And (2) How well
could you explain this image to another person? The independent variables were Image
(12 different images were presented to participants), and Type of Device Used (participants
told us what device they were using—we limited the analysis here to Blackberry, iPhone,
and iPad). The analysis yielded significant differences for Image (using Wilks’ Lambda,
Error bar chart of responses to “How much
F [22, 1784] = 2.32, p .001), but not for Type of Device Used, nor for the interaction
do you like this image?, and How well could
of Type of Device Used and Image. Univariate analyses of the significant finding for Type
you explain this image to another person” by
of Device indicate that the question, How well could you explain this image to another
the type of device used. Circle represents mean
person was significant at p .001, but the question, How much do you like this image?
response, and bars represent 95% confidence
fell short of significance (p = .078).
interval for the mean.
References
Arcand, K.K., Watzke, M., Smith, L.F., Smith, J.K. “Surveying Aesthetics Astronomy:
Previous Aesthetics Astronomy studies
1
interval for the mean.
4
A project exploring the public’s perception of astronomy images and the science within”
Communicating Astronomy with the Public. Issue 10 December 2010.
Smith, L.F., Smith, J.K., Arcand K.K., Smith, R.K., Holterman Ten Hove, K. Aesthetics and
Astronomy: Studying the public’s perception and understanding of imagery from space.
Science Communication Journal. August 2010.
Preferences: Ratings of images by survey
Locher, P.J., Smith, L.F., Smith, J.K., The influence of presentation format and viewer
participants.
training in the visual arts on the perception of pictorial and aesthetic qualities of paintings.
Perception, volume 30. 2001.
Acknowledgements
This project was developed with funding from the Smithsonian Scholarly Studies Program. Additional funding was provided by the Hinode X-ray
Telescope, performed under NASA contract NNM07AB07C, with in-kind contributions from the Education and Outreach group for NASA’s Chandra X-ray
Observatory, operated by SAO under NASA Contract NAS8-03060.
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12