skip to main content
article

Design considerations for collaborative visual analytics

Published:01 March 2008Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Visualizations leverage the human visual system to support the process of sensemaking, in which information is collected, organized, and analyzed to generate knowledge and inform action. Although most research to date assumes a single-user focus on perceptual and cognitive processes, in practice, sensemaking is often a social process involving parallelization of effort, discussion, and consensus building. Thus, to fully support sensemaking, interactive visualization should also support social interaction. However, the most appropriate collaboration mechanisms for supporting this interaction are not immediately clear. In this article, we present design considerations for asynchronous collaboration in visual analysis environments, highlighting issues of work parallelization, communication, and social organization. These considerations provide a guide for the design and evaluation of collaborative visualization systems.

References

  1. Pirolli P, Card SK. Information foraging. Psychological Review 1999; 106: 643-675.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Pirolli P, Card SK. The sensemaking process and leverage points for analyst technology as identified through cognitive task analysis. Proceedings of International Conference on Intelligence Analysis (McLean, VA) MITRE: 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Thomas JJ, Cook, KA (Eds). Illuminating the Path: The Research and Development Agenda for Visual Analytics. IEEE Press: New York, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Dorling D, Barford A, Newman A. Worldmapper: The world as you've never seen it before. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 2006; 12: 757-764. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Dietz PH, Leigh DL. DiamondTouch: a multi-user touch technology, ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (Orlando, FL) ACM: New York, NY, 2001; 219-226. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. General Dynamics. Command post of the future. {WWW document} http://www.gdc4s.com/content/detail.cfm?item= 2a58f8e2-ef2b-4bbl-9251-42ee4961dd7f (accessed 28 November 2007).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Agrawala M, Beers A, Froehlich B, Hanrahan P, MacDowall P, Bolas M. The two-user responsive workbench: support for collaboration through individual views of a shared space. ACM Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques (SIGGRAPH'97) (Los Angeles, CA) ACM: New York, NY, 1997; 27-332. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Anupam V, Bajaj CL, Schikore D, Schikore M. Distributed and collaborative visualization. IEEE Computer 1994; 27: 37-43. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Brodlie KW, Duce DA, Gallop JR, Walton JPRB, Wood JD. Distributed and collaborative visualization. Computer Graphics Forum 2004; 23: 223-251.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Chuah MC, Roth S. Visualizing common ground. Information Visualization (IV) (London, UK) IEEE Computer Society: Washington, DC, 2003; 365-372. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Benko H, Ishak EW, Feiner S. Collaborative mixed reality visualization of an archaeological excavation. IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR 2004) (Arlington, VA) IEEE Computer Society: Washington, DC, 2004; 132-140. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Chui Y-P, Heng P-A. Enhancing view consistency in collaborative medical visualization systems using predictive-based attitude estimation. First IEEE International Workshop on Medical Imaging and Augmented Reality (MIAR '01) (Hong Kong) IEEE Computer Society: Washington, DC, 2001; 292. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Viégas FB, Wattenberg M. Communication-minded visualization: a call to action. IBM Systems Journal 2006; 45: 801-812. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Benbunan-Fich R, Hiltz SR, Turoff M. A comparative content analysis of face-to-face vs. asynchronous group decision making. Decision Support Systems Archive 2003; 34: 457-469. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Heer J, Viégas F, Wattenberg M. Voyagers and voyeurs: supporting asynchronous collaborative information visualization. ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'07) (San Jose, CA) ACM: New York, NY, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Spotfire Decision Site Posters. {WWW document} http:// spotfire.com/products/decisionsite_posters.cfm (accessed 28 November 2007).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Swivel. {WWW document} http://www.swivel.com (accessed 28 November 2007).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Viégas FB, Wattenberg M, van Ham F, Kriss J, McKeon M. Many eyes: a site for visualization at internet scale. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics (InfoVis'07) 2007; 13: 1121-1128. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Wikimapia. {WWW document} http://wikimapia.org (accessed 28 November 2007).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Benkler Y. Coase's penguin, or, Linux and The Nature of the Firm. Yale Law Journal 2002; 112: 369-446.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Card SK, Mackinlay JD, Shneiderman B. Readings in Information Visualization: Using Vision To Think. Morgan-Kaufmann: San Francisco, CA, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Heer J, Agrawala M. Software design patterns for information visualization. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 2006; 12: 853-860. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Russell DM, Stefik MJ, Pirolli P, Card SK. The cost structure of sensemaking. ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'93) (Amsterdam, Netherlands) ACM: New York, NY, 1993. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Pirolli P. Social information foraging. Information Foraging: Adaptive Interaction with Information, Chapter 8. Oxford University Press: Oxford, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Dourish M, Chalmers M. Running out of space: models of information navigation. Human Computer Interaction (HCI'94) (Glasgow, UK) Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1994.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Zhang J, Norman DA. Representations in distributed cognitive tasks. Cognitive Science 1994; 18: 87-122.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. von Ahn L. Games with a purpose. IEEE Computer 2006; 39: 92-94. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Wright W, Schroh D, Proulx P, Skaburskis A, Cort B. The sandbox for analysis: concepts and evaluation. ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'06) (Montreal, Quebec) ACM: New York, NY, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Brennan SE, Mueller K, Zelinsky G, Ramakrishnan IV, Warren DS, Kaufman A. Toward a multi-analyst, collaborative framework for visual analytics. IEEE Symposium of Visual Analytics Science and Technology (Baltimore, MD) IEEE Computer Society: Washington, DC, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Billman D, Convertino G, Shrager J, Pirolli P, Massar J. Collaborative intelligence analysis with CACHE and its effects on information gathering and cognitive bias. Human Computer Interaction Consortium Workshop (Frasier, CO) 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Gordon TF, Karacapilidis N. The Zeno argumentation framework. Sixth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (Melbourne, Australia) ACM Press: New York, NY, 1997; 10-18. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Clark HH, Brennan SE. Grounding in communication. In: Resnick LB, Levine RM and Teasley SD (Eds). Perspectives on Socially Shared Cognition. APA Books: Washington, 1991; 127-149.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Clark HH, Wilkes-Gibbs D. Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition 1986; 22: 1-39.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Brennan SE. How conversation is shaped by visual and spoken evidence. In: Trueswell J and Tanenhaus M (Eds). Approaches to Studying World-Situated Language Use: Bridging the Language-as-Product and Language-as-Action Traditions. MIT Press: Cambridge, 2005; 95-129.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Gergle D, Kraut RE, Fussell SR. Language efficiency and visual technology: minimizing collaborative effort with visual information. Journal of Language & Social Psychology 2004; 23: 491-517.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Wattenberg M, Kriss J. Designing for social data analysis. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 2006; 12: 549-557. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Carroll J, Rosson MB, Convertino G, Ganoe CH. Awareness and teamwork in computer-supported collaborations. Interacting with Computers 2005; 18: 21-46. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Dourish P, Belotti V. Awareness and coordination in shared workspaces. ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work (Toronto, ON) ACM: New York, NY, 1992; 107-114. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Brush AJ, Bargeron D, Grudin J, Gupta A. Notification for shared annotation of digital documents. ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'02) (Minneapolis, MN) ACM: New York, NY, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  40. Hill WC, Hollan JD, Wroblewski D, McCandless T. Edit wear and read wear. ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'92) (Monterey, CA) ACM: New York, NY, 1992; 3-9. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Willett W, Heer J, Agrawala M. Scented Widgets: improving navigation cues with embedded visualizations. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 2007; 13: 1129-1136. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Clark HH. Pointing and placing. In: Kita S (Ed). Pointing where Language, Culture, and Cognition Meet. Erlbaum: London, 2003; 243-268.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Hill WC, Hollan JD. Deixis and the future of visualization excellence. IEEE Visualization (San Diego, CA) IEEE Computer Society: Washington, DC, 2007; 314-319. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Becket RA, Cleveland WS. Brushing scatterplots. Technometrics 1987; 29: 127-142. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Martin AR, Ward MO. High dimensional brushing for interactive exploration of multivariate data. IEEE Visualization (Atlanta, GA) IEEE Computer Society: Washington, DC, 1995; 271-278. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. Ahlberg C, Shneiderman B. Visual information seeking: tight coupling of dynamic query filters with starfield displays. ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'94) (Boston, MA) ACM: New York, NY, 1994; 313-317. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. Yang D, Rundensteiner EA, Ward MO. Analysis guided visual exploration to multivariate data. IEEE Symposium on Visual Analytics Science and Technology (Sacramento, CA) IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. Clark HH, Schreuder R, Buttrick S. Common ground and the understanding of demonstrative reference. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 1983; 22: 245-258.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. Heer J. Socializing visualization. CHI 2006 Workshop on Social Visualization (Montreal, Quebec) ACM: New York, NY, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. Ling K, Beenen G, Ludford P, Wang X, Chang K, Cosley D, Frankowski D, Terveen L, Rashid AM, Resnick P, Kraut R. Using social psychology to motivate contributions to online communities. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 2005; 10 (http://jcmc.indiana.edu/).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  51. Cheshire C. Selective Incentives and Generalized Information Exchange. Social Psychology Quarterly 2007; 70: 82-100.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. Caillois R. Man, Play, and Games. Free Press of Glencoe: Glencoe, IL, 1961.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. Salen K, Zimmerman E. Rules of Play: Fundamentals of Game Design. MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  54. Mohammed S. Toward an understanding of cognitive consensus in a group decision-making context. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 2001; 37: 408-425.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  55. Donath JS. Identity and deception in the virtual community. In: Smith M and Kollock P (Eds). Communities in Cyberspace. Routledge: London, 1998.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  56. Goffman E. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Anchor Books: New York, 1959.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  57. Walther JB. Computer-mediated communication: impersonal, interpersonal and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research 1996; 23: 3-43.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  58. Sproull L, Kiesler S. Computers, networks, and work. Scientific American 1991; 265: 84-91.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  59. Resnick P, Zeckhauser R, Swanson J, Lockwood K. The value of reputation on eBay: a controlled experiment. Experimental Economics 2006; 9: 79-101.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  60. Brooks FP. The Mythical Man-Month: Essays on Software Engineering. Addison-Wesley: Reading, MA, 1975. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  61. Hardin R. The free rider problem. In: Zalta EN (Ed). The stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  62. Cummings J. Work groups, structural diversity, and knowledge sharing in a global organization. Management Science 2004; 50: 352-364. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  63. Schultz-Hart S, Frey D, Lüthgens C, Moscovici S. Biased information search in group decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2000; 78: 655-669.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  64. Burt RS. Structural holes and good ideas. American Journal of Sociology 2004; 110: 349-399.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  65. Wu F, Huberman BA, Adamic LA, Tyler JR. Information flow in social groups. Physica A: Statistical and Theoretical Physics 2004; 337: 327.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  66. Golder SA, Huberman BA. Usage patterns of collaborative tagging systems. Journal of Information Science 2006; 32: 198-208. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  67. Scheff TJ. Toward a sociological model of consensus. American Sociological Review 1967; 32: 32-46.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  68. Hastie R. Experimental evidence on group accuracy. In: Grofman B and Owen G (eds). Decision Research, Vol. 2, JAI Press: Greenwich, CT 1986; 129-157.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  69. Gigone D, Hastie R. The common knowledge effect: information sharing and group judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1993; 65: 959-974.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  70. Surowiecki J. The Wisdom of Crowds. Random House: New York, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  71. Stasser G, Titus W. Pooling of unshared information in group decision making: biased information sampling during discussion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1985; 57: 67-78.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  72. Eccles R, Kapler T, Harper R, Wright W. Stories in geotime. IEEE Symposium on Visual Analytics Science and Technology (Sacramento, CA) IEEE Computer Society: Washington, DC, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Design considerations for collaborative visual analytics

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in

        Full Access