Skip to Main Content
Book Chapter

Earth, Mind, and Paper: Field Sketches as Expert Representations of the Hat Creek Fault Zone

By
Heather L. Petcovic
Heather L. Petcovic
Department of Geosciences and the Mallinson Institute for Science Education, Western Michigan University, 1903 W. Michigan Ave., Kalamazoo, Michigan 49008, U.S.A. (e-mail: heather.petcovic@wmich.edu)
Search for other works by this author on:
Carol J. Ormand
Carol J. Ormand
Science Education Resource Center, Carleton College, One North College W-SERC, Northfield, Minnesota 55057, U.S.A. and Department of Geoscience, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1215 W. Dayton St., Madison, Wisconsin 53706, U.S.A. (e-mail: cormand@carleton.edu)
Search for other works by this author on:
Bob Krantz
Bob Krantz
ConcocoPhillips Geoscience and Reservoir Engineering Technology, 600 North Dairy Ashford, Houston, Texas 77079, U.S.A. (e-mail: bob.krantz@conocophillips.com)
Search for other works by this author on:
Published:
January 01, 2016

Abstract

Sketching, particularly in field settings, is a common but powerful means of communication and visualization in the geosciences. Here, we investigate the range of sketch types and annotations made by expert geoscientists and non-geoscientists during a field trip to the Hat Creek fault zone (northern California) taken during the 2013 AAPG Hedberg Research Conference. Participants (N=42) included geologists and seismic interpreters employed in the oil and gas industry (n=20), geologists employed in academia (n=16), and non-geoscientist software developers and cognitive scientists (n=6). A total of 361 sketches of the normal fault system were collected during stops at three field modules. Sketches were thematically coded by sketch type (e.g., map, perspective landscape view, cross-section, three-dimensional [3-D] block diagram) and annotation type (e.g., fault symbols, reference locations, questions, labels). Overall, two-dimensional (2-D) perspective sketches and maps were the most common representation type, whereas 3-D block diagrams were rare. Statistical analysis of code counts suggests that the choice of sketch and annotation types is largely driven by characteristics of the field trip stop and/or the particular task required. Non-geoscientists more frequently produced perspective sketches from their actual viewpoint, but were less likely to annotate diagrams. As compared to industry peers, academic geoscientists were more likely to create related sets of sketches. Conversely, industry geoscientists were more likely to explain their thinking and provide alternate explanations. This work is a first step in exploring geoscientists’ sketching practices in the field, and may have implications for both undergraduate education and industry training.

You do not currently have access to this article.

Figures & Tables

Contents

AAPG Memoir

3-D Structural Interpretation: Earth, Mind, and Machine

Bob Krantz
Bob Krantz
Search for other works by this author on:
Carol Ormand
Carol Ormand
Search for other works by this author on:
Brett Freeman
Brett Freeman
Search for other works by this author on:
American Association of Petroleum Geologists
Volume
111
ISBN electronic:
9781629812779
Publication date:
January 01, 2016

GeoRef

References

Related

Citing Books via

Close Modal
This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal