Towards Identification and Mitigation of Task-Based Challenges in Comparative Visualization Studies

Aditeya Pandey, Uzma Haque Syeda, M. Borkin
{"title":"Towards Identification and Mitigation of Task-Based Challenges in Comparative Visualization Studies","authors":"Aditeya Pandey, Uzma Haque Syeda, M. Borkin","doi":"10.1109/BELIV51497.2020.00014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The effectiveness of a visualization technique is dependent on how well it supports the tasks or goals of an end-user. To measure the effectiveness of a visualization technique, researchers often use a comparative study design. In a comparative study, two or more visualization techniques are compared over a set of tasks and commonly measure human performance in terms of task accuracy and completion time. Despite the critical role of tasks in comparative studies, the current lack of guidance in existing literature on best practices for task selection and communication of research results in evaluation studies is problematic. In this work, we systematically identify and curate the task-based challenges of comparative studies by reviewing existing visualization literature on the topic. Furthermore, for each of the presented challenges we discuss the potential threats to validity for a comparative study. The challenges discussed in this paper are further backed by evidence identified in a detailed survey of comparative tree visualization studies. Finally, we recommend best practices from personal experience and the surveyed tree visualization studies to provide guidelines for other researchers to mitigate the challenges. The survey data and a free copy of the paper is available at https://osf.io/g3btk/","PeriodicalId":282674,"journal":{"name":"2020 IEEE Workshop on Evaluation and Beyond - Methodological Approaches to Visualization (BELIV)","volume":"58 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2020 IEEE Workshop on Evaluation and Beyond - Methodological Approaches to Visualization (BELIV)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/BELIV51497.2020.00014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

The effectiveness of a visualization technique is dependent on how well it supports the tasks or goals of an end-user. To measure the effectiveness of a visualization technique, researchers often use a comparative study design. In a comparative study, two or more visualization techniques are compared over a set of tasks and commonly measure human performance in terms of task accuracy and completion time. Despite the critical role of tasks in comparative studies, the current lack of guidance in existing literature on best practices for task selection and communication of research results in evaluation studies is problematic. In this work, we systematically identify and curate the task-based challenges of comparative studies by reviewing existing visualization literature on the topic. Furthermore, for each of the presented challenges we discuss the potential threats to validity for a comparative study. The challenges discussed in this paper are further backed by evidence identified in a detailed survey of comparative tree visualization studies. Finally, we recommend best practices from personal experience and the surveyed tree visualization studies to provide guidelines for other researchers to mitigate the challenges. The survey data and a free copy of the paper is available at https://osf.io/g3btk/
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
比较可视化研究中任务挑战的识别与缓解
可视化技术的有效性取决于它对最终用户的任务或目标的支持程度。为了测量可视化技术的有效性,研究人员经常使用比较研究设计。在比较研究中,在一组任务上比较两种或多种可视化技术,通常根据任务准确性和完成时间来衡量人类的表现。尽管任务在比较研究中发挥着关键作用,但目前在现有文献中缺乏关于评估研究中任务选择和研究结果交流的最佳实践的指导是有问题的。在这项工作中,我们通过回顾关于该主题的现有可视化文献,系统地识别和策划比较研究中基于任务的挑战。此外,对于每个提出的挑战,我们讨论了对比较研究有效性的潜在威胁。在比较树可视化研究的详细调查中确定的证据进一步支持了本文中讨论的挑战。最后,我们从个人经验和调查的树可视化研究中推荐最佳实践,为其他研究人员提供指导,以减轻挑战。调查数据和论文的免费副本可在https://osf.io/g3btk/上获得
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Extending Recommendations for Creative Visualization-Opportunities Workshops BELIV 2020 Committees [Title page iii] [Copyright notice] BELIV 2020 Preface
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1