Huahai Yang
Yunyao Li
Michelle X. Zhou
Skip Abstract Section
Abstract
We are developing an automated visualization system that helps users combine two or more existing information graphics to form an integrated view. To establish empirical foundations for building such a system, we designed and conducted two studies on Amazon Mechanical Turk to understand users’ comprehension and preferences of composite visualization under different conditions (e.g., data and tasks). In Study 1, we collected more than 1,500 textual descriptions capturing about 500 participants’ insights of given information graphics, which resulted in a task-oriented taxonomy of visual insights. In Study 2, we asked 240 participants to rank composite visualizations by their suitability for acquiring a given visual insight identified in Study 1, which resulted in ranked user preferences of visual compositions for acquiring each type of insight. In this article, we report the details of our two studies and discuss the broader implications of our crowdsourced research methodology and results to HCI-driven visualization research.
- J. S. Allwood and P. Gärdenfors. 1999. Cognitive Semantics: Meaning and Cognition. John Benjamins Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- J. G. Altonji and R. M. Blank. 1999. Race and gender in the labor market. Handbook of Labor Economics 3, 3143--3259.Google ScholarCross Ref
- R. Amar, J. Eagan, and J. Stasko. 2005. Low-level components of analytic activity in information visualization. In InfoVis. Google ScholarDigital Library
- F. J. Anscombe. 1973. Graphs in statistical analysis. American Statistician 27, 17--21.Google Scholar
- L. W. Barsalou. 1999. Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22, 4, 577--660.Google ScholarCross Ref
- R. A. Becker, W. S. Cleveland, and M.-J. Shyu. 1996. The visual design and control of trellis display. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics 5, 2 (1996), 123--155.Google Scholar
- A. J. Berinsky, G. A. Huber, and G. S. Lenz. 2012. Evaluating online labor markets for experimental research: Amazon.com’s Mechanical Turk. Political Analysis (R. M. Alvarez, ed.). DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpr057Google Scholar
- J. Bertin. 1983. Semiology of Graphics (W. J. Berg, trans.). University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, WI. Google ScholarDigital Library
- T. J. Blocker and D. L. Eckberg. 1997. Gender and environmentalism: Results from the 1993 general social survey. Social Science Quarterly 78, 841--858.Google Scholar
- M. Canham and M. Hegarty. 2010. Effects of knowledge and display design on comprehension of complex graphics. Learning and Instruction 20, 2, 155--166. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.02.014Google ScholarCross Ref
- P. A. Carpenter and P. Shah. 1998. A model of the perceptual and conceptual processes in graph comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 4, 2 (1998), 75.Google ScholarCross Ref
- S. M. Casner. 1991. Task-analytic approach to the automated design of graphic presentations. ACM Transactions on Graphics 10, 2 (1991), 111--151. Google ScholarDigital Library
- C. Chen and M. Czerwinski. 2000. Empirical evaluation of information visualization: An introduction. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 53, 5 (2000), 631--635. Google ScholarDigital Library
- M. Chuah and S. Roth. 1996. On the semantics of interactive visualizations. In IEEE InfoVis’96. 29--36. Google ScholarDigital Library
- W. Cleveland and R. McGill. 1985. Graphical perception and graphical methods for analyzing scientific data. Science 229, 828--833.Google ScholarCross Ref
- C. Collins and S. Carpendale. 2007. VisLink: Revealing relationships amongst visualizations. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 13, 6 (2007), 1192--1199. Google ScholarDigital Library
- W. Croft and D. A. Cruse. 2004. Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- H. M. Culbertson and R. D. Powers. 1959. A study of graph comprehension difficulties. Educational Technology Research and Development 7, 3 (1959), 97--110.Google Scholar
- F. R. Curcio. 1989. Developing Graph Comprehension. Elementary and Middle School Activities. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
- C. Danis, F. Viegas, M. Wattenberg, and J. Kris. 2008. Your place or mine: Visualization as a community component. In CHI’08. 275--284. Google ScholarDigital Library
- G. DeSanctis. 1984. Computer graphics as decision aids: Directions for research. Decision Sciences 15, 463--487.Google ScholarCross Ref
- M. Dörk, S. Carpendale, C. Collins, and C. Williamson. 2008. VisGets: Coordinated visualizations for Web-based information exploration and discovery. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 14, 6 (2008), 1205--1212. Google ScholarDigital Library
- D. Downey. 1995. When bigger is not better: Family size, parental resources, and children’s educational performance. American Sociological Review 60, 746--761.Google ScholarCross Ref
- V. Evans and M. Green. 2006. Cognitive Linguistics: An Introduction. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
- H. D. Fain, E. L. Kick, B. L. Davis, and T. J. Burns. 1997. World-system position, tropical climate, national development, and infant mortality: A cross-national analysis of 86 countries. Human Ecology Review 3, 197--203.Google Scholar
- G. Fauconnier. 1994. Mental Spaces: Aspects of Meaning Construction in Natural Language. Cambridge University Press.Google ScholarCross Ref
- G. Fauconnier and M. Turner. 2008. The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind’s Hidden Complexities. Basic Books.Google Scholar
- C. J. Fillmore. 1985. Frames and the semantics of understanding. Quaderni di Semantica 6, 2 (1985), 222--254.Google Scholar
- L. Frank, M. Andresen, and T. Schmid. 2004. Obesity relationships with community design, physical activity, and time spent in cars. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 27, 87--96.Google ScholarCross Ref
- M. Friedman. 1937. The use of ranks to avoid the assumption of normality implicit in the analysis of variance. Journal of the American Statistical Association 32, 675--701.Google ScholarCross Ref
- S. N. Friel, F. R. Curcio, and G. W. Bright. 2001. Making sense of graphs: Critical factors influencing comprehension and instructional implications. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 124--158.Google ScholarCross Ref
- D. Gillborn and H. S. Mirza. 2000. Educational Inequality: Mapping Race, Class and Gender. A Synthesis of Research Evidence. Office for Standards in Education, London.Google Scholar
- B. Glaser and A. Strauss. 1967. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Aldine Transaction.Google Scholar
- E. Goldsmith. 1984. Research into Illustration: An Approach and a Review. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- D. Gotz and Z. Wen. 2009. Behavior-driven visualization recommendation. In IUI. Google ScholarDigital Library
- R. W. Hamming. 1950. Error detecting and error correcting codes. Bell System Technical Journal 29, 2, 147--160.Google ScholarCross Ref
- A. F. Hayes and K. Krippendorff. 2007. Answering the call for a standard reliability measure for coding data. Communication Methods and Measures 1, 1 (2007), 77--89.Google ScholarCross Ref
- J. Heer, F. B. Viegas, and M. Wattenberg. 2007. Voyagers and voyeurs: Supporting asynchronous collaborative information visualization. In CHI. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Heer and M. Bostock. 2010. Crowdsourcing graphical perception: Using Mechanical Turk to assess visualization design. In CHI’10. 203--212. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Heer, N. Kong, and M. Agrawala. 2009. Sizing the horizon: The effects of chart size and layering on the graphical perception of time series visualizations. In CHI’09. 1203--1312. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Heer and G. Robertson. 2008. Animated transitions in statistical data. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 13, 6 (2008), 1240--1247. Google ScholarDigital Library
- A. Inselberg and B. Dimsdale. 1991. Parallel coordinates. In Human-Machine Interactive Systems. Springer, 199--233.Google Scholar
- P. G. Ipeirotis. 2010. Demographics of Mechanical Turk. CeDER-10-01 working paper.Google Scholar
- W. Javed and N. Elmqvist. 2012. Exploring the design space of composite visualization. In Pacific Visualization Symposium (PacificVis). 1--8. Google ScholarDigital Library
- M. Johnson. 1990. The Body in the Mind: The Bodily Basis of Meaning, Imagination, and Reason. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- S.-H. Kim, H. Yun, and J. S. Yi. 2012. How to filter out random clickers in a crowdsourcing-based study? In 2012 BELIV Workshop: Beyond Time and Errors-Novel Evaluation Methods for Visualization. 15. Google ScholarDigital Library
- O. Kitamura, T. Kuroiwa, Y. Kawamoto, and E. Kaneko. 1998. A study on the improved tanker structure against collision and grounding damage. In PRADS.Google Scholar
- S. M. Kosslyn. 1989. Understanding charts and graphs. Applied Cognitive Psychology 3, 185--226.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Z. Kövecses and G. Radden. 1998. Metonymy: Developing a cognitive linguistic view. Cognitive Linguistics 9, 37--78.Google ScholarCross Ref
- G. Lakoff. 1987. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- G. Lakoff and M. Johnson. 2008. Metaphors We Live By. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- J. Lemaire. 1985. Automobile Insurance: Actuarial Models. Hingham, MA: Kluwer-Nijhof.Google ScholarCross Ref
- J. Mackinlay. 1986. Automating the design of graphical presentations of relational information. ACM Transactions on Graphics 5, 2, 110--141. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Mackinlay, P. Hanrahan, and C. Stolte. 2007. Show me: Automatic presentation for visual analysis. IEEE Transactions on Visual and Computer Graphics 13, 6 (2007), 1137--1144. Google ScholarDigital Library
- P. McCullagh and J. A. Nelder. 1989. Generalized Linear Models. Chapman & Hall.Google Scholar
- R. Metoyer, B. Lee, N. H. Riche, and M. Czerwinski. 2012. Understanding the verbal language and structure of end-user descriptions of data visualizations. In CHI’12. Google ScholarDigital Library
- National Center for Health Statistics. 2000. National Health Interview Survey.Google Scholar
- National Opinion Research Center. 1991. General Social Survey 1991 {United States}.Google Scholar
- National Opinion Research Center. 1993. General Social Survey 1993 {United States}.Google Scholar
- C. North. 2006. Visualization viewpoints: Toward measuring visualization insight. IEEE Computer Graphic and Application 26, 3 (2006), 6--9. Google ScholarDigital Library
- S. Pinker. 1990. A theory of graph comprehension. Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Testing 73--126.Google Scholar
- H. Rosling. 2009. Homepage. Retrieved from www.gapminder.org.Google Scholar
- S. F. Roth, M. C. Chuah, S. Kerpedjiev, J. Kolojejchick, and P. Lucas. 1997. Toward an information visualization workspace: Combining multiple means of expression. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 12, 1 (1997), 131--185. Google ScholarDigital Library
- S. F. Roth and J. Mattis. 1991. Automating the presentation of information. In AAAI.Google Scholar
- W. S. Sarle. 1990. The VARCLUS Procedure.Google Scholar
- P. Shah and E. G. Freedman. 2011. Bar and line graph comprehension: An interaction of top-down and bottom-up processes. Topics in Cognitive Science 3, 3 (2011), 560--578.Google ScholarCross Ref
- P. Shah, E. G. Freedman, and I. Vekiri. 2005. The comprehension of quantitative information in graphical displays. The Cambridge Handbook of Visuospatial Thinking 426--476.Google Scholar
- P. Shah, R. E. Mayer, and M. Hegarty. 1999. Graphs as aids to knowledge construction: Signaling techniques for guiding the process of graph comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology 91, 4 (1999), 690.Google ScholarCross Ref
- B. Shneiderman. 1996. The eyes have it: A task by data type taxonomy of information visualizations. In IEEE Visual Languages’96. 336--343. Google ScholarDigital Library
- D. K. Simkin and R. Hastie. 1986. An information-processing analysis of graph perception. Journal of the American Statistical Association 82, 454--465.Google ScholarCross Ref
- J. Stasko, R. Catrambone, M. Guzdial, and K. Mcdonald. 2000. An evaluation of space-filling information visualizations for depicting hierarchical structures. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 53, 5 (2000), 663--694. Google ScholarDigital Library
- L. Talmy. 2000. Toward a Cognitive Semantics. Vol. 2. MIT Press.Google Scholar
- J. J. Thomas and K. A. Cook. 2005. Illuminating the Path: The Research and Development Agenda for Visual Analytics. IEEE Computer Society.Google Scholar
- E. R. Tufte and G. Howard. 1983. The Visual Display of Quantitative Information. Graphics Press. Google ScholarDigital Library
- United Nations. 1995. World Economic and Social Survey 1995.Google Scholar
- F. Viegas, M. Wattenberg, F. van Ham, J. Kriss, and M. McKeon. 2007. ManyEyes: A site for visualization at Internet scale. IEEE Trans. Vis. Comp. Graphics 13, 6 (2007), 1121--1128. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Z. Wen and M. Zhou. 2008a. Evaluating the use of data transformation for information visualization. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 14, 6 (2008), 1309--1316. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Z. Wen and M. X. Zhou. 2008b. An optimization-based approach to dynamic data transformation for smart visualization. In IUI’08. 70--79. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Z. Wen, M. X. Zhou, and V. Aggarwal. 2005. An optimization-based approach to dynamic visual context management. In InfoVis. 25--32. Google ScholarDigital Library
- H. Wickham. 2009. ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. Springer. Google ScholarDigital Library
- H. Wickham and H. Hofmann. 2011. Product plots. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 17, 12 (2011), 2223--2230. Google ScholarDigital Library
- L. Wilkinson. 2005. The Grammer of Graphics (2nd ed.). Springer. Google ScholarDigital Library
- L. Wilkinson. 2012. The grammar of graphics. In Handbook of Computation Statistics (J. E. Gentle, W. K. Härdle, and Y. Mori, eds.). Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer, 375--414.Google Scholar
- D. Woods. 1984. Visual momentum: A concept to improve the cognitive coupling of person and computer. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 21, 229--244. Google ScholarDigital Library
- M. Zhou and M. Chen. 2003. Automated generation of graphic sketches by examples. In IJCAI. Google ScholarDigital Library
- M. X. Zhou and S. K. Feiner. 1996. Data characterization for automatically visualizing heterogeneous information. In IEEE Information Visualization ’96. 13--20. Google ScholarDigital Library
- M. X. Zhou and S. K. Feiner. 1998. Visual task characterization for automated visual discourse synthesis. In CHI. Google ScholarDigital Library
- G. K. Zipf. 1949. Human Behavior and the Principle of Least Effort. Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Understand users’ comprehension and preferences for composing information visualizations
Recommendations
Visualizing Visualizations: User Interfaces for Managing and Exploring Scientific Visualization Data
The process of scientific visualization is inherently iterative. A good visualization comes from experimenting with visualization, rendering, and viewing parameters to bring out the most relevant information in the data. A good data visualization system ...
Designing Information Visualizations for Elite Soccer Children's Different Levels of Comprehension
NordiCHI '16: Proceedings of the 9th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer InteractionWe describe a study that sought to understand elite soccer children's use of visualizations to learn about, and improve their own sports performance. We specifically investigate how visualizations support the players' data comprehension. In this process,...
Constructing Interactive Visualizations with iVoLVER
CHI EA '16: Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing SystemsiVoLVER, the Interactive Visual Language for Visualization Extraction and Reconstruction, is a web-based pen and touch system that graphically supports the construction of interactive visualizations and allows the extraction of data from different types ...
Comments