PanoramicData: Data Analysis through Pen & Touch

Towards Systematic Design Considerations for Visualizing Cross-View Data Relationships

Due to the scale of data and the complexity of analysis tasks, insight discovery often requires coordinating multiple visualizations (views), with each view displaying different parts of data or the same data from different perspectives. For example, to analyze car sales records, a marketing analyst uses a line chart to visualize the trend of car sales, a scatterplot to inspect the price and horsepower of different cars, and a matrix to compare the transaction amounts in types of deals. To explore related information across multiple views, current visual analysis tools heavily rely on brushing and linking techniques, which may require a significant amount of user effort (e.g., many trial-and-error attempts). There may be other efficient and effective ways of displaying cross-view data relationships to support data analysis with multiple views, but currently there are no guidelines to address this design challenge. In this article, we present systematic design considerations for visualizing cross-view data relationships, which leverages descriptive aspects of relationships and usable visual context of multi-view visualizations. We discuss pros and cons of different designs for showing cross-view data relationships, and provide a set of recommendations for helping practitioners make design decisions.

From Jam Session to Recital: Synchronous Communication and Collaboration Around Data in Organizations

Prior research on communicating with visualization has focused on public presentation and asynchronous individual consumption, such as in the domain of journalism. The visualization research community knows comparatively little about synchronous and multimodal communication around data within organizations, from team meetings to executive briefings. We conducted two qualitative interview studies with individuals who prepare and deliver presentations about data to audiences in organizations. In contrast to prior work, we did not limit our interviews to those who self-identify as data analysts or data scientists. Both studies examined aspects of speaking about data with visual aids such as charts, dashboards, and tables. One study was a retrospective examination of current practices and difficulties, from which we identified three scenarios involving presentations of data. We describe these scenarios using an analogy to musical performance: small collaborative team meetings are akin to jam session, while more structured presentations can range from semi-improvisational performances among peers to formal recitals given to executives or customers. In our second study, we grounded the discussion around three design probes, each examining a different aspect of presenting data: the progressive reveal of visualization to direct attention and advance a narrative, visualization presentation controls that are hidden from the audience's view, and the coordination of a presenter's video with interactive visualization. Our distillation of interviewees' responses surfaced twelve themes, from ways of authoring presentations to creating accessible and engaging audience experiences.

Semantic Snapping for Guided Multi-View Visualization Design

Visual information displays are typically composed of multiple visualizations that are used to facilitate an understanding of the underlying data. A common example are dashboards, which are frequently used in domains such as finance, process monitoring and business intelligence. However, users may not be aware of existing guidelines and lack expert design knowledge when composing such multi-view visualizations. In this paper, we present semantic snapping, an approach to help non-expert users design effective multi-view visualizations from sets of pre-existing views. When a particular view is placed on a canvas, it is "aligned" with the remaining views-not with respect to its geometric layout, but based on aspects of the visual encoding itself, such as how data dimensions are mapped to channels. Our method uses an on-the-fly procedure to detect and suggest resolutions for conflicting, misleading, or ambiguous designs, as well as to provide suggestions for alternative presentations. With this approach, users can be guided to avoid common pitfalls encountered when composing visualizations. Our provided examples and case studies demonstrate the usefulness and validity of our approach.

Interweaving Multimodal Interaction With Flexible Unit Visualizations for Data Exploration

Multimodal interfaces that combine direct manipulation and natural language have shown great promise for data visualization. Such multimodal interfaces allow people to stay in the flow of their visual exploration by leveraging the strengths of one modality to complement the weaknesses of others. In this article, we introduce an approach that interweaves multimodal interaction combining direct manipulation and natural language with flexible unit visualizations. We employ the proposed approach in a proof-of-concept system, DataBreeze. Coupling pen, touch, and speech-based multimodal interaction with flexible unit visualizations, DataBreeze allows people to create and interact with both systematically bound (e.g., scatterplots, unit column charts) and manually customized views, enabling a novel visual data exploration experience. We describe our design process along with DataBreeze's interface and interactions, delineating specific aspects of the design that empower the synergistic use of multiple modalities. We also present a preliminary user study with DataBreeze, highlighting the data exploration patterns that participants employed. Finally, reflecting on our design process and preliminary user study, we discuss future research directions.

Touch? Speech? or Touch and Speech? Investigating Multimodal Interaction for Visual Network Exploration and Analysis

Interaction plays a vital role during visual network exploration as users need to engage with both elements in the view (e.g., nodes, links) and interface controls (e.g., sliders, dropdown menus). Particularly as the size and complexity of a network grow, interactive displays supporting multimodal input (e.g., touch, speech, pen, gaze) exhibit the potential to facilitate fluid interaction during visual network exploration and analysis. While multimodal interaction with network visualization seems like a promising idea, many open questions remain. For instance, do users actually prefer multimodal input over unimodal input, and if so, why? Does it enable them to interact more naturally, or does having multiple modes of input confuse users? To answer such questions, we conducted a qualitative user study in the context of a network visualization tool, comparing speech- and touch-based unimodal interfaces to a multimodal interface combining the two. Our results confirm that participants strongly prefer multimodal input over unimodal input attributing their preference to: 1) the freedom of expression, 2) the complementary nature of speech and touch, and 3) integrated interactions afforded by the combination of the two modalities. We also describe the interaction patterns participants employed to perform common network visualization operations and highlight themes for future multimodal network visualization systems to consider.

How Progressive Visualizations Affect Exploratory Analysis

The stated goal for visual data exploration is to operate at a rate that matches the pace of human data analysts, but the ever increasing amount of data has led to a fundamental problem: datasets are often too large to process within interactive time frames. Progressive analytics and visualizations have been proposed as potential solutions to this issue. By processing data incrementally in small chunks, progressive systems provide approximate query answers at interactive speeds that are then refined over time with increasing precision. We study how progressive visualizations affect users in exploratory settings in an experiment where we capture user behavior and knowledge discovery through interaction logs and think-aloud protocols. Our experiment includes three visualization conditions and different simulated dataset sizes. The visualization conditions are: (1) blocking, where results are displayed only after the entire dataset has been processed; (2) instantaneous, a hypothetical condition where results are shown almost immediately; and (3) progressive, where approximate results are displayed quickly and then refined over time. We analyze the data collected in our experiment and observe that users perform equally well with either instantaneous or progressive visualizations in key metrics, such as insight discovery rates and dataset coverage, while blocking visualizations have detrimental effects.