A Design Space of Vision Science Methods for Visualization Research

Use of the perceptual point-spread function to assess dysphotopsias

Nowadays many patients are choosing EDOF or multifocal lenses for replacement of natural lens in cataract surgery. This can result in issues such as presence of dysphotopsias, namely halo and glare. In this work, we propose a new perimetry method to describe dysphotopsias in far-field region in a presence of bright, point-like light source. We constructed a custom device and designed measurement procedure for quantitative measurement of dysphotopias in the center of visual field and used it to examine patients with mild cataracts or implanted IOLs. Our approach may help in establishing an objective method to study and compare dysphotopsias.

A Perception Study for Unit Charts in the Context of Large-Magnitude Data Representation

Unit charts are a common type of chart for visualizing scientific data. A unit chart is a chart used to communicate quantities of things by making the number of symbols on the chart proportional to the number of items represented. An accurate perception of the order of magnitude is essential to evaluating whether a unit chart can effectively convey information. Previous studies have primarily focused on perceptual properties at small order-of-magnitude scales or the efficacy of pictographs in unit charts. However, few researchers have explored the perceptual effectiveness of unit charts when representing large orders of magnitude. In this study, we performed a series of sampling measurements to investigate the visual–perceptual characteristics of unit charts when representing asymmetric interactions such as large-scale numbers. The results showed that under the restriction of the current conventional display medium, unit charts still offer a significant advantage over bar charts in a single-scale visual overview. However, this comes at the cost of a longer response time. Although this study constitutes basic research, accumulating evidence about how people reason about magnitudes beyond human perception is critical to the field of information science. This study may contribute to understanding how viewers perceive unit charts and the factors that influence graphical perception. This article provides some specific guidelines for designing unit charts that may be useful to visualization designers.

Measuring Effects of Spatial Visualization and Domain on Visualization Task Performance: A Comparative Study

Understanding one's audience is foundational to creating high impact visualization designs. However, individual differences and cognitive abilities influence interactions with information visualization. Different user needs and abilities suggest that an individual's background could influence cognitive performance and interactions with visuals in a systematic way. This study builds on current research in domain-specific visualization and cognition to address if domain and spatial visualization ability combine to affect performance on information visualization tasks. We measure spatial visualization and visual task performance between those with tertiary education and professional profile in business, law & political science, and math & computer science. We conducted an online study with 90 participants using an established psychometric test to assess spatial visualization ability, and bar chart layouts rotated along Cartesian and polar coordinates to assess performance on spatially rotated data. Accuracy and response times varied with domain across chart types and task difficulty. We found that accuracy and time correlate with spatial visualization level, and education in math & computer science can indicate higher spatial visualization. Additionally, we found that motivational differences between domains could contribute to increased levels of accuracy. Our findings indicate discipline not only affects user needs and interactions with data visualization, but also cognitive traits. Our results can advance inclusive practices in visualization design and add to knowledge in domain-specific visual research that can empower designers across disciplines to create effective visualizations.

Evaluating the Use of Uncertainty Visualisations for Imputations of Data Missing At Random in Scatterplots

Most real-world datasets contain missing values yet most exploratory data analysis (EDA) systems only support visualising data points with complete cases. This omission may potentially lead the user to biased analyses and insights. Imputation techniques can help estimate the value of a missing data point, but introduces additional uncertainty. In this work, we investigate the effects of visualising imputed values in charts using different ways of representing data imputations and imputation uncertainty-no imputation, mean, 95% confidence intervals, probability density plots, gradient intervals, and hypothetical outcome plots. We focus on scatterplots, which is a commonly used chart type, and conduct a crowdsourced study with 202 participants. We measure users' bias and precision in performing two tasks-estimating average and detecting trend-and their self-reported confidence in performing these tasks. Our results suggest that, when estimating averages, uncertainty representations may reduce bias but at the cost of decreasing precision. When estimating trend, only hypothetical outcome plots may lead to a small probability of reducing bias while increasing precision. Participants in every uncertainty representation were less certain about their response when compared to the baseline. The findings point towards potential trade-offs in using uncertainty encodings for datasets with a large number of missing values. This paper and the associated analysis materials are available at: https://osf.io/q4y5r/.

VisHikers' Guide to Evaluation: Competing Considerations in Study Design

In this Viewpoint article, we describe the persistent tensions between various camps on the "right" way to conduct evaluations in visualization. Visualization as a field is the amalgamation of cognitive and perceptual sciences and computer graphics, among others. As a result, the relatively disjointed lineages in visualization understandably approach the topic of evaluation very differently. It is both a blessing and a curse to our field. It is a blessing, because the collaboration of diverse perspectives is the breeding ground of innovation. Yet it is a curse, because as a community, we have yet to resolve an appreciation for differing perspectives on the topic of evaluation. We explicate these differing expectations and conventions to appreciate the spectrum of evaluation design decisions. We describe some guiding questions that researchers may consider when designing evaluations to navigate differing readers' evaluation expectations.

Which emphasis technique to use? Perception of emphasis techniques with varying distractors, backgrounds, and visualization types

Emphasis effects are visual changes that make data elements distinct from their surroundings. Designers may use computational saliency models to predict how a viewer's attention will be guided by a specific effect; however, although saliency models provide a foundational understanding of emphasis perception, they only cover specific visual effects in abstract conditions. To address these limitations, we carried out crowdsourced studies that evaluate emphasis perception in a wider range of conditions than previously studied. We varied effect magnitude, distractor number and type, background, and visualization type, and measured the perceived emphasis of 12 visual effects. Our results show that there are perceptual commonalities of emphasis across a wide range of environments, but also that there are limitations on perceptibility for some effects, dependent on a visualization's background or type. We developed a model of emphasis predictability based on simple scatterplots that can be extended to other viewing conditions. Our studies provide designers with new understanding of how viewers experience emphasis in realistic visualization settings.

Two graphs walk into a bar: Readout-based measurement reveals the Bar-Tip Limit error, a common, categorical misinterpretation of mean bar graphs

How do viewers interpret graphs that abstract away from individual-level data to present only summaries of data such as means, intervals, distribution shapes, or effect sizes? Here, focusing on the mean bar graph as a prototypical example of such an abstracted presentation, we contribute three advances to the study of graph interpretation. First, we distill principles for Measurement of Abstract Graph Interpretation (MAGI principles) to guide the collection of valid interpretation data from viewers who may vary in expertise. Second, using these principles, we create the Draw Datapoints on Graphs (DDoG) measure, which collects drawn readouts (concrete, detailed, visuospatial records of thought) as a revealing window into each person's interpretation of a given graph. Third, using this new measure, we discover a common, categorical error in the interpretation of mean bar graphs: the Bar-Tip Limit (BTL) error. The BTL error is an apparent conflation of mean bar graphs with count bar graphs. It occurs when the raw data are assumed to be limited by the bar-tip, as in a count bar graph, rather than distributed across the bar-tip, as in a mean bar graph. In a large, demographically diverse sample, we observe the BTL error in about one in five persons; across educational levels, ages, and genders; and despite thoughtful responding and relevant foundational knowledge. The BTL error provides a case-in-point that simplification via abstraction in graph design can risk severe, high-prevalence misinterpretation. The ease with which our readout-based DDoG measure reveals the nature and likely cognitive mechanisms of the BTL error speaks to the value of both its readout-based approach and the MAGI principles that guided its creation. We conclude that mean bar graphs may be misinterpreted by a large portion of the population, and that enhanced measurement tools and strategies, like those introduced here, can fuel progress in the scientific study of graph interpretation.

Visualization as a stimulus domain for vision science

Traditionally, vision science and information/data visualization have interacted by using knowledge of human vision to help design effective displays. It is argued here, however, that this interaction can also go in the opposite direction: the investigation of successful visualizations can lead to the discovery of interesting new issues and phenomena in visual perception. Various studies are reviewed showing how this has been done for two areas of visualization, namely, graphical representations and interaction, which lend themselves to work on visual processing and the control of visual operations, respectively. The results of these studies have provided new insights into aspects of vision such as grouping, attentional selection and the sequencing of visual operations. More generally yet, such results support the view that the perception of visualizations can be a useful domain for exploring the nature of visual cognition, inspiring new kinds of questions as well as casting new light on the limits to which information can be conveyed visually.