Evaluating Visualization Sets: Trade-offs Between Local Effectiveness and Global Consistency

Zening Qu, J. Hullman
{"title":"Evaluating Visualization Sets: Trade-offs Between Local Effectiveness and Global Consistency","authors":"Zening Qu, J. Hullman","doi":"10.1145/2993901.2993910","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Evaluation criteria like expressiveness and effectiveness favor optimal use of space and visual encoding channels in a single visualization. However, individually optimized views may be inconsistent with one another when presented as a set in rec-ommender systems and narrative visualizations. For example, two visualizations might use very similar color palettes for different data fields, or they might render the same field but in different scales. These inconsistencies in visualization sets can cause interpretation errors and increase the cognitive load on viewers trying to analyze a set of visualizations. We propose two high-level principles for evaluating visualization set consistency: (1) the same fields should be presented in the same way, (2) different fields should be presented differently. These two principles are operationalized as a set of constraints for common visual encoding channels (x, y, color, size, and shape) to enable automated visualization set evaluation. To balance global (visualization set) consistency and local (single visualization) effectiveness, trade-offs in space and visual encodings have to be made. We devise an effectiveness preservation score to guide the selection of which conflicts to surface and potentially revise for sets of quantitative and ordinal encodings and a palette resource allocation mechanism for nominal encodings.","PeriodicalId":235801,"journal":{"name":"Workshop on Beyond Time and Errors: Novel Evaluation Methods for Visualization","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"19","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Workshop on Beyond Time and Errors: Novel Evaluation Methods for Visualization","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/2993901.2993910","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 19

Abstract

Evaluation criteria like expressiveness and effectiveness favor optimal use of space and visual encoding channels in a single visualization. However, individually optimized views may be inconsistent with one another when presented as a set in rec-ommender systems and narrative visualizations. For example, two visualizations might use very similar color palettes for different data fields, or they might render the same field but in different scales. These inconsistencies in visualization sets can cause interpretation errors and increase the cognitive load on viewers trying to analyze a set of visualizations. We propose two high-level principles for evaluating visualization set consistency: (1) the same fields should be presented in the same way, (2) different fields should be presented differently. These two principles are operationalized as a set of constraints for common visual encoding channels (x, y, color, size, and shape) to enable automated visualization set evaluation. To balance global (visualization set) consistency and local (single visualization) effectiveness, trade-offs in space and visual encodings have to be made. We devise an effectiveness preservation score to guide the selection of which conflicts to surface and potentially revise for sets of quantitative and ordinal encodings and a palette resource allocation mechanism for nominal encodings.
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
评估可视化集:局部有效性和全局一致性之间的权衡
诸如表达性和有效性之类的评估标准有利于在单个可视化中最佳地使用空间和视觉编码通道。然而,当在推荐系统和叙事可视化中作为一组呈现时,单独优化的视图可能彼此不一致。例如,两个可视化可能对不同的数据字段使用非常相似的调色板,或者它们可能以不同的比例呈现相同的字段。可视化集合中的这些不一致可能导致解释错误,并增加试图分析一组可视化的观众的认知负荷。我们提出了评估可视化集一致性的两个高级原则:(1)相同的字段应该以相同的方式呈现;(2)不同的字段应该以不同的方式呈现。这两个原则可作为一组通用视觉编码通道(x、y、颜色、大小和形状)的约束进行操作,以实现自动的可视化集评估。为了平衡全局(可视化集)一致性和局部(单个可视化)有效性,必须在空间和视觉编码方面进行权衡。我们设计了一个有效的保存分数来指导选择哪些冲突要浮出水面,并可能对定量和序数编码集进行修改,并为标称编码设计了调色板资源分配机制。
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
Lowering the Barrier for Successful Replication and Evaluation A Nested Workflow Model for Visual Analytics Design and Validation Cognitive Stages in Visual Data Exploration Evaluating Information Visualization on Mobile Devices: Gaps and Challenges in the Empirical Evaluation Design Space Action Design Research and Visualization Design
×
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