From Top-Right to User-Right: Perceptual Prioritization of Point-Feature Label Positions

June 12, 2024 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› arXiv.org

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

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Petr BobÑk, Ladislav Čmolík, Martin Čadík arXiv ID 2407.11996 Category cs.HC: Human-Computer Interaction Cross-listed cs.GR Citations 2 Venue arXiv.org Last Checked 4 months ago
Abstract
In cartography, Geographic Information Systems (GIS), and visualization, the position of a label relative to its point feature is crucial for readability and user experience. Alongside other factors, the point-feature label placement (PFLP) is typically governed by the Position Priority Order (PPO), a systematic raking of potential label positions around a point feature according to predetermined priorities. While there is a broad consensus on factors such as avoiding label conflicts and ensuring clear label-to-feature associations, there is no agreement on PPO. Most PFLP techniques rely on traditional PPOs grounded in typographic and cartographic conventions established decades ago, which may no longer meet today's user expectations. In contrast, commercial products like Google Maps and Mapbox use non-traditional PPOs for unreported reasons. Our extensive user study introduces the Perceptual Position Priority Order (PerceptPPO), a user-validated PPO that significantly departs from traditional conventions. A key finding is that labels placed above point features are significantly preferred by users, contrary to the conventional top-right position. We also conducted a supplementary study on the preferred label density, an area scarcely explored in prior research. Finally, we performed a comparative user study assessing the perceived quality of PerceptPPO over existing PPOs, advocating its adoption in cartographic and GIS applications, as well as in other types of visualizations. Our research, supported by nearly 800 participants from 48 countries and over 45,500 pairwise comparisons, offers practical guidance for designers and application developers aiming to optimize user engagement and comprehension, paving the way for more intuitive and accessible visualizations.
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