Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorFandel, Chloé A.
dc.contributor.authorBreshears, David D.
dc.contributor.authorMcMahon, Ellen E.
dc.date.accessioned2018-06-07T18:34:10Z
dc.date.available2018-06-07T18:34:10Z
dc.date.issued2018-01
dc.identifier.citationFandel, C. A., D. D. Breshears, and E. E. McMahon. 2018. Implicit assumptions of conceptual diagrams in environmental science and best practices for their illustration. Ecosphere 9(1):e02072. 10.1002/ecs2.2072en_US
dc.identifier.issn21508925
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/ecs2.2072
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10150/627906
dc.description.abstractIn the earth and environmental sciences, many fundamental processes are explained through conceptual illustrations—a powerful medium for scientific communication. The processes depicted are generally highly complex, spatially and temporally variable, subject to high degrees of uncertainty, and non‐linearly impacted by anthropogenic actions. Conceptual illustrations necessarily simplify these processes, but also often suffer from a preventable lack of visual clarity, and/or are based on implicit assumptions that are mismatched to key conclusions in published literature. In this Innovative Viewpoint paper, we highlight considerations of conceptual and visual clarity relevant to illustrations in earth and environmental sciences. Using the water cycle as an example, we examine a range of conceptual illustrations of this process to assess what ideas they convey. An exploratory survey of 32 water cycle diagrams shows that they tend to depict generalized, well‐defined processes. Anthropogenic influences are included and/or implied in only half the diagrams, and none depict uncertainty in any form. The concept of the water cycle conveyed by these diagrams is therefore not quite the same as the concept of the water cycle as understood by hydrologists. This mismatch may negatively impact decision‐making related to water resources management, because the parties involved may unknowingly hold significantly different conceptual models of the processes at work. Other concepts in the earth and environmental sciences may be susceptible to similar issues. Our analysis highlights the importance of carefully assessing the assumptions and simplifying choices inherent in the process of translating a concept into an illustration. We conclude with an example of how these issues can be remedied by presenting a modified water cycle diagram designed to address common misconceptions associated with dryland systems, account for uncertainty in fluxes, and include key anthropogenic effects. A general list of best practices, many of which were used to develop this diagram, is included to help increase awareness among environmental researchers of strategies for increasing the conceptual and visual clarity of illustrations.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherWileyen_US
dc.relation.urlhttp://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/ecs2.2072en_US
dc.rights© 2018 Fandel et al. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License.en_US
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.subjectanthropogenic impactsen_US
dc.subjectscience communicationen_US
dc.subjectscience educationen_US
dc.subjectscientific illustrationen_US
dc.subjectuncertaintyen_US
dc.subjectwater budgeten_US
dc.subjectwater cycleen_US
dc.titleImplicit assumptions of conceptual diagrams in environmental science and best practices for their illustrationen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.contributor.departmentUniv Arizona, Sch Nat Resources & Environmen_US
dc.contributor.departmentUniv Arizona, Dept Hydrol & Atmospher Scien_US
dc.identifier.journalEcosphereen_US
dc.description.noteOpen Access Article. UA Open Access Publishing Fund.en_US
dc.description.collectioninformationThis item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at repository@u.library.arizona.edu.en_US
dc.eprint.versionFinal published versionen_US
dc.source.journaltitleEcosphere
dc.source.volume9
dc.source.issue1
dc.source.beginpagee02072
refterms.dateFOA2018-06-07T18:34:11Z


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
Fandel_et_al-2018-Ecosphere.pdf
Size:
6.377Mb
Format:
PDF
Description:
Final Published version

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

© 2018 Fandel et al. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License.
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as © 2018 Fandel et al. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License.