Search for: All records

Data visualizations can empower an audience to make informed decisions. At the same time, deceptive representations of data can lead to inaccurate interpretations while still providing an illusion of data-driven insights. Existing research on misleading visualizations primarily focuses on examples of charts and techniques previously reported to be deceptive. These approaches do not necessarily describe how charts mislead the general population in practice. We instead present an analysis of data visualizations found in a real-world discourse of a significant global event---Twitter posts with visualizations related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Our work shows that, contrary to conventional wisdom, violations of visualization design guidelines are not the dominant way people mislead with charts. Specifically, they do not disproportionately lead to reasoning errors in posters' arguments. Through a series of examples, we present common reasoning errors and discuss how even faithfully plotted data visualizations can be used to support misinformation online. 

A common research process in visualization is for visualization researchers to collaborate with domain experts to solve particular applied data problems. While there is existing guidance and expertise around how to structure collaborations to strengthen research contributions, there is comparatively little guidance on how to navigate the implications of, and power produced through the socio-technical entanglements of collaborations. In this paper, we qualitatively analyze reflective interviews of past participants of collaborations from multiple perspectives: visualization graduate students, visualization professors, and domain collaborators. We juxtapose the perspectives of these individuals, revealing tensions about the tools that are built and the relationships that are formed — a complex web of competing motivations. Through the lens of matters of care, we interpret this web, concluding with considerations that both trouble and necessitate reformation of current patterns around collaborative work in visualization design studies to promote more equitable, useful, and care-ful outcomes. 

How do we ensure the veracity of science? The act of manipulating or fabricating scientific data has led to many high‐profile fraud cases and retractions. Detecting manipulated data, however, is a challenging and time‐consuming endeavor. Automated detection methods are limited due to the diversity of data types and manipulation techniques. Furthermore, patterns automatically flagged as suspicious can have reasonable explanations. Instead, we propose a nuanced approach where experts analyze tabular datasets, e.g., as part of the peer‐review process, using a guided, interactive visualization approach. In this paper, we present an analysis of how manipulated datasets are created and the artifacts these techniques generate. Based on these findings, we propose a suite of visualization methods to surface potential irregularities. We have implemented these methods in Ferret, a visualization tool for data forensics work. Ferret makes potential data issues salient and provides guidance on spotting signs of tampering and differentiating them from truthful data.

 

The trouble with data is that it frequently provides only an imperfect representation of a phenomenon of interest. Experts who are familiar with their datasets will often make implicit, mental corrections when analyzing a dataset, or will be cautious not to be overly confident about their findings if caveats are present. However, personal knowledge about the caveats of a dataset is typically not incorporated in a structured way, which is problematic if others who lack that knowledge interpret the data. In this work, we define such analysts' knowledge about datasets as data hunches. We differentiate data hunches from uncertainty and discuss types of hunches. We then explore ways of recording data hunches, and, based on a prototypical design, develop recommendations for designing visualizations that support data hunches. We conclude by discussing various challenges associated with data hunches, including the potential for harm and challenges for trust and privacy. We envision that data hunches will empower analysts to externalize their knowledge, facilitate collaboration and communication, and support the ability to learn from others' data hunches. 

Predicting and capturing an analyst’s intent behind a selection in a data visualization is valuable in two scenarios: First, a successful prediction of a pattern an analyst intended to select can be used to auto-complete a partial selection which, in turn, can improve the correctness of the selection. Second, knowing the intent behind a selection can be used to improve recall and reproducibility. In this paper, we introduce methods to infer analyst’s intents behind selections in data visualizations, such as scatterplots. We describe intents based on patterns in the data, and identify algorithms that can capture these patterns. Upon an interactive selection, we compare the selected items with the results of a large set of computed patterns, and use various ranking approaches to identify the best pattern for an analyst’s selection. We store annotations and the metadata to reconstruct a selection, such as the type of algorithm and its parameterization, in a provenance graph. We present a prototype system that implements these methods for tabular data and scatterplots. Analysts can select a prediction to auto-complete partial selections and to seamlessly log their intents. We discuss implications of our approach for reproducibility and reuse of analysis workflows. We evaluate our approach in a crowd-sourced study, where we show that auto-completing selection improves accuracy, and that we can accurately capture pattern-based intent. 

Quantifying user performance with metrics such as time and accuracy does not show the whole picture when researchers evaluate complex, interactive visualization tools. In such systems, performance is often influenced by different analysis strategies that statistical analysis methods cannot account for. To remedy this lack of nuance, we propose a novel analysis methodology for evaluating complex interactive visualizations at scale. We implement our analysis methods in reVISit, which enables analysts to explore participant interaction performance metrics and responses in the context of users' analysis strategies. Replays of participant sessions can aid in identifying usability problems during pilot studies and make individual analysis processes salient. To demonstrate the applicability of reVISit to visualization studies, we analyze participant data from two published crowdsourced studies. Our findings show that reVISit can be used to reveal and describe novel interaction patterns, to analyze performance differences between different analysis strategies, and to validate or challenge design decisions. 

Provenance tracking is widely acknowledged as an important component of visualization systems. By tracking provenance data, visualization designers can achieve a wide variety of important functionality, ranging from action recovery (undo/redo), reproducibility, collaboration and sharing, to logging in support of quantitative and longitudinal evaluation. Yet, for web-based visualizations, there are currently no libraries that make provenance tracking easy to implement in visualization systems. The result of this is that visualization designers either develop ad-hoc solutions that are rarely comprehensive, or don't track provenance at all. In this paper, we introduce a web-based software library --- Trrack --- that is designed for easy integration in existing or future visualization systems. Trrack supports a wide range of use cases, from simple action recovery, to capturing intent and reasoning, and can be used to share states with collaborators and store provenance on a server. Trrack also includes an optional provenance visualization component that supports annotation of states and aggregation of events. 

Visualizing multivariate networks is challenging because of the trade-offs necessary for effectively encoding network topology and encoding the attributes associated with nodes and edges. A large number of multivariate network visualization techniques exist, yet there is little empirical guidance on their respective strengths and weaknesses. In this paper, we describe a crowdsourced experiment, comparing node-link diagrams with on-node encoding and adjacency matrices with juxtaposed tables. We find that node-link diagrams are best suited for tasks that require close integration between the network topology and a few attributes. Adjacency matrices perform well for tasks related to clusters and when many attributes need to be considered. We also reflect on our method of using validated designs for empirically evaluating complex, interactive visualizations in a crowdsourced setting. We highlight the importance of training, compensation, and provenance tracking. 

Most tabular data visualization techniques focus on overviews, yet many practical analysis tasks are concerned with investigating individual items of interest. At the same time, relating an item to the rest of a potentially large table is important. In this work, we present Taggle, a tabular visualization technique for exploring and presenting large and complex tables. Taggle takes an item-centric, spreadsheet-like approach, visualizing each row in the source data individually using visual encodings for the cells. At the same time, Taggle introduces data-driven aggregation of data subsets. The aggregation strategy is complemented by interaction methods tailored to answer specific analysis questions, such as sorting based on multiple columns and rich data selection and filtering capabilities. We demonstrate Taggle by a case study conducted by a domain expert on complex genomics data analysis for the purpose of drug discovery.