Search for: All records

Visualization literacy is an essential skill for accurately interpreting data to inform critical decisions. Consequently, it is vital to understand the evolution of this ability and devise targeted interventions to enhance it, requiring concise and repeatable assessments of visualization literacy for individuals. However, current assessments, such as the Visualization Literacy Assessment Test ( vlat ), are time-consuming due to their fixed, lengthy format. To address this limitation, we develop two streamlined computerized adaptive tests ( cats ) for visualization literacy, a-vlat and a-calvi , which measure the same set of skills as their original versions in half the number of questions. Specifically, we (1) employ item response theory (IRT) and non-psychometric constraints to construct adaptive versions of the assessments, (2) finalize the configurations of adaptation through simulation, (3) refine the composition of test items of a-calvi via a qualitative study, and (4) demonstrate the test-retest reliability (ICC: 0.98 and 0.98) and convergent validity (correlation: 0.81 and 0.66) of both CATS via four online studies. We discuss practical recommendations for using our CATS and opportunities for further customization to leverage the full potential of adaptive assessments. All supplemental materials are available at https://osf.io/a6258/ . 

We propose a new approach to uncertainty communication: we keep the uncertainty representation fixed, but adjust the distribution displayed to compensate for biases in people’s subjective probability in decision-making. To do so, we adopt a linear-in-probit model of subjective probability and derive two corrections to a Normal distribution based on the model’s intercept and slope: one correcting all right-tailed probabilities, and the other preserving the mode and one focal probability. We then conduct two experiments on U.S. demographically-representative samples. We show participants hypothetical U.S. Senate election forecasts as text or a histogram and elicit their subjective probabilities using a betting task. The first experiment estimates the linear-in-probit intercepts and slopes, and confirms the biases in participants’ subjective probabilities. The second, preregistered follow-up shows participants the bias-corrected forecast distributions. We find the corrections substantially improve participants’ decision quality by reducing the integrated absolute error of their subjective probabilities compared to the true probabilities. These corrections can be generalized to any univariate probability or confidence distribution, giving them broad applicability. Our preprint, code, data, and preregistration are available at https://doi.org/10.17605/osf.io/kcwxm 

We conducted a longitudinal study during the 2022 U.S. midterm elections, investigating the real-world impacts of uncertainty visualizations. Using our forecast model of the governor elections in 33 states, we created a website and deployed four uncertainty visualizations for the election forecasts: single quantile dotplot (1-Dotplot), dual quantile dotplots (2-Dotplot), dual histogram intervals (2-Interval), and Plinko quantile dotplot (Plinko), an animated design with a physical and probabilistic analogy. Our online experiment ran from Oct. 18, 2022, to Nov. 23, 2022, involving 1,327 participants from 15 states. We use Bayesian multilevel modeling and post-stratification to produce demographically-representative estimates of people's emotions, trust in forecasts, and political participation intention. We find that election forecast visualizations can heighten emotions, increase trust, and slightly affect people's intentions to participate in elections. 2-Interval shows the strongest effects across all measures; 1-Dotplot increases trust the most after elections. Both visualizations create emotional and trust gaps between different partisan identities, especially when a Republican candidate is predicted to win. Our qualitative analysis uncovers the complex political and social contexts of election forecast visualizations, showcasing that visualizations may provoke polarization. This intriguing interplay between visualization types, partisanship, and trust exemplifies the fundamental challenge of disentangling visualization from its context, underscoring a need for deeper investigation into the real-world impacts of visualizations. Our preprint and supplements are available at https://doi.org/osf.io/ajq8f .