Introductie en situering

Visualisatie: data in beeldLeuven, 30 september 2013

Erik Duval (& Joris Klerkx)Dept. Computerwetenschappen

http://erikduval.wordpress.com/ & http://datavislab.org

http://www.slideshare.net/erik.duval

2

http://www.standaard.be/cnt/dmf20130930_00766773

Information Visualisationisthe use of interactive visual representationsto amplify cognition

[Card. et. al]

Humans have advanced perceptual abilities

Our brains makes us extremely good at recognizing visual patterns

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anscombe's_quartet

http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/

wereldbevolking neemt toe...

http://prefuse.org/doc/manual/introduction/structure/

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-15391515

make it personal...

http://www.visualizing.org/marathon2012/recap#winners

tell a story...

can be beautiful too..

http://hint.fm/wind/

http://vimeo.com/75043122

can be beautiful too..

Don’t use visualisations to mislead...

http://flowingdata.com/category/statistics/mistaken-data/

BP - leak in gulf of mexico

http://www.perceptualedge.com/

http://flowingdata.com/category/statistics/mistaken-data/

DON’T USE VISUALIZATIONS TO LIE... (1/3)

are just by visually looking for the largest number of con-nected nodes. These larger clusters can be a first indicationof where high profile authors are located. However, in thisstate, neither the names of the authors nor the titles of thepapers are visible yet.

When the user wants to look into more details, he can zoomin to a specific part of the publication space. This is whatFigure 3 depicts. The author names become clearly visible,so that the user can identify a particular author. The usercan also click on paper nodes to get more information on thepaper. To make it easier to identify which authors are moreprolific in the field, the node size of the author is directlyproportional to his number of publications. In Figure 3, forexample, author Martin Wolpers has the largest number ofpublications and is a good candidate to use as a landmarkin the exploration process.

4. EVALUATIONIn this section, we describe how we have evaluated our firstiteration. Subsections 4.1 and 4.2 elaborate on the setupof the evaluation. Subsection 4.3 discusses the results ofthe evaluation and finally, in subsection 4.4, we draw ourconclusions from this evaluation.

4.1 DescriptionTo evaluate the application, we deployed our tabletop in themain hall of the ECTEL 2010 conference [42]. This roomwas the main location for co�ee breaks and figure 4 illus-trates the tabletop setup.The evaluation was conceived as a formative evaluation, inorder to gather feedback on the design and implementationof the application from real users in a real life scenario. Wefollowed the think aloud method, where the participantsverbally describe their thoughts during the evaluation. Inthis way, the participants reveal their view on the systemand possibly their misconceptions [28]. It started o� withgeneral questions (age, gender, profession, vision and leftor right handed) about the participants together with theirbackgrounds. The participants were introduced to the ap-plication by asking them if they could explain what theysaw. We also asked them one basic content-related ques-tion to get them started: “Find author x and find out howmany papers he wrote in ECTEL 2007”. When needed, theparticipants were given extra explanation about the appli-cation. After this, the evaluation continued with tasks theyhad to perform. For each task, we noted whether the tasksucceeded, how fluently the task was performed and whetherthe participant needed help or not. Finally, the participantswere asked for some general feedback and they filled in asmall questionnaire about usefulness and ease of use. Eachevaluation took between 20 and 30 minutes.

4.2 ParticipantsThere was a total of 11 participants, aged between 27 and 60.All participants were researchers, right handed and all butone had corrected vision. Only 3 of the participants con-sidered that they had a bit of experience with multitouchinteraction, the other 8 said they had a lot of experience.Regarding experience towards tabletops or multitouch wallshowever, only one person described himself as experienced.To find out how experienced the participants were in the

Figure 4: Setting of the evaluation.

Figure 5: An overview of the number of papers theparticipants have written

research area, they were asked about their years of experi-ence in the Technology Enhanced Learning (TEL) researcharea, the number of papers published and how many of thempublished in TEL. Half of the participants claimed to haveup to 3 years of experience and the other half claimed tohave many years of experience. On average, the partici-pants have published around 32 papers, from which 16 inthe TEL area. Three participants have published more than60 papers, from which 20 or more in the TEL area. Fig-ure 5 shows in detail the number of published papers perparticipant.

4.3 ResultsIn this section, we describe the results of the evaluation.These results are grouped in three parts. First, we reporton the tasks the participants had to perform, second, wesummarize the most important feedback, and third, we takea look at the results from the questionnaire.

4.3.1 Tasks

Vandeputte, Bram; Duval, Erik; Klerkx, Joris. Applying design principles in authorship networks - a case study, CHI2012, Austin, TX, USA, 5-10 May 2012, CHI EA '12: Proceedings of the 2012 ACM Annual Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems Extended Abstracts, pages 741-744, ACM

Nagel, T., Duval, E.: Muse: Visualizing the origins and connections of institutions basedon co-authorship of publications. Science2.0 for TEL workshop at EC-TEL 2010, Barcelona, Spain

MUSE - Visualizing the origins and connections of institutions based on co-authorship of publications

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wQpTM7ASc-w

#mume13

http://datavislab.org

14u40Informatie visualisatie: analyse en communicatie van data, Andrew Vande Moere

15u10Data visualisatie voor management inzichten, Dirk Stevens

15u40 koffiepauze

16u00Visualisatie voor algemene en gepersonaliseerde toepassingen, van 2D naar 3D, Marc Proesmans

16u30Serious Gaming: game engines voor maatschappelijke en businesstoepassingen, Jeroen Wauters, Jelle Husson en Lieven Van den Audenaeren

17u00 Vraag en antwoord

@ErikDuvalhttp://erikduval.wordpress.com

?