Search for: All records

Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM) is a low-cost method of 3D printing that involves stacking horizontal layers of plastic. FDM is used to produce tactile graphics and interfaces for people with visual impairments. Unfortunately, the print orientation can alter the structure and quality of braille and text. The difference between printing braille vertically and horizontally has been documented. However, we found no comprehensive study of these angles or the angles in between, nor any study providing a quantitative and qualitative user evaluation. We conducted two mixed-methods studies to evaluate the performance of braille printed at different angles. We measured reading time and subjective preference and performed a thematic analysis of participants' responses. Our participants were faster using and preferred 75° and vertical braille over horizontal braille. These results provide makers with guidelines for creating models with readable 3D-printed braille. 

In this paper, we present the Vis Repligogy framework that enables conducting replication studies in the class. Replication studies are crucial to strengthening the data visualization field and ensuring its foundations are solid and methods accurate. Although visualization researchers acknowledge the epistemological significance of replications and their necessity to establish trust and reliability, the field has made little progress to support the publication of such studies and, importantly, provide methods to the community to encourage replications. Therefore, we contribute Vis Repligogy, a novel framework to systematically incorporate replications within visualization course curricula that not only teaches students replication and evaluation methodologies but also results in executed replication studies to validate prior work. To validate the feasibility of the framework, we present case studies of two graduate data visualization courses that implemented it. These courses resulted in a total of five replication studies. Finally, we reflect on our experience implementing the Vis Repligogy framework to provide useful recommendations for future use. We envision this framework will encourage instructors to conduct replications in their courses, help facilitate more replications in visualization pedagogy and in research, and support a culture shift towards reproducible research. Supplemental materials of this paper are available at https://osf.io/ncb6d/. 

We present a mixed methods user study evaluating augmented reality (AR) as a visualization technique for use in astronomy journal publications. This work is motivated by the highly spatial nature of scientific visualizations employed in astronomy, including spatial reasoning tasks for hypothesis generation and scientific communications. In this 52-person user study, we evaluate two AR approaches (one traditional tabletop projection and the other with a ‘tangible’ aid) as spatial 3D visualization techniques, as compared to a baseline 3D rendering on a phone. We identify a significant difference in mental and physical workload between the two AR conditions in men and women. Qualitatively, through thematic coding of interviews, we identify notable observed differences ranging from device-specific physical challenges, to subdomain-specific utility within astronomy. The confluence of quantitative and qualitative results suggest a tension between workload and engagement when comparing non-AR and AR technologies. We summarize these findings and contribute them for reference in data visualization research furthering novel scientific communications in astronomy journal publications. 

We present a mixed methods user study evaluating augmented reality (AR) as a visualization technique for use in astronomy journal publications. This work is motivated by the highly spatial nature of scientific visualizations employed in astronomy, including spatial reasoning tasks for hypothesis generation and scientific communications. In this 52-person user study, we evaluate two AR approaches (one traditional tabletop projection and the other with a 'tangible' aid) as spatial 3D visualization techniques, as compared to a baseline 3D rendering on a phone. We identify a significant difference in mental and physical workload between the two AR conditions in men and women. Qualitatively, through thematic coding of interviews, we identify notable observed differences ranging from device-specific physical challenges, to subdomain-specific utility within astronomy. The confluence of quantitative and qualitative results suggest a tension between workload and engagement when comparing non-AR and AR technologies. We summarize these findings and contribute them for reference in data visualization research furthering novel scientific communications in astronomy journal publications.