Communicative Visualizations as a Learning Problem

September 15, 2020 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics

πŸ‘» CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Eytan Adar, Elsie Lee arXiv ID 2009.07095 Category cs.HC: Human-Computer Interaction Citations 48 Venue IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics Last Checked 3 months ago
Abstract
Significant research has provided robust task and evaluation languages for the analysis of exploratory visualizations. Unfortunately, these taxonomies fail when applied to communicative visualizations. Instead, designers often resort to evaluating communicative visualizations from the cognitive efficiency perspective: "can the recipient accurately decode my message/insight?" However, designers are unlikely to be satisfied if the message went 'in one ear and out the other.' The consequence of this inconsistency is that it is difficult to design or select between competing options in a principled way. The problem we address is the fundamental mismatch between how designers want to describe their intent, and the language they have. We argue that visualization designers can address this limitation through a learning lens: that the recipient is a student and the designer a teacher. By using learning objectives, designers can better define, assess, and compare communicative visualizations. We illustrate how the learning-based approach provides a framework for understanding a wide array of communicative goals. To understand how the framework can be applied (and its limitations), we surveyed and interviewed members of the Data Visualization Society using their own visualizations as a probe. Through this study we identified the broad range of objectives in communicative visualizations and the prevalence of certain objective types.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

πŸ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt β€” Human-Computer Interaction

Died the same way β€” πŸ‘» Ghosted