ABSTRACT
Visualizations such as bar charts help users reason about data, but are mostly screen-based, rarely physical, and almost never physical and dynamic. This paper investigates the role of physically dynamic bar charts and evaluates new interactions for exploring and working with datasets rendered in dynamic physical form. To facilitate our exploration we constructed a 10x10 interactive bar chart and designed interactions that supported fundamental visualisation tasks, specifically; annotation, filtering, organization, and navigation. The interactions were evaluated in a user study with 17 participants. Our findings identify the preferred methods of working with the data for each task i.e. directly tapping rows to hide bars, highlight the strengths and limitations of working with physical data, and discuss the challenges of integrating the proposed interactions together into a larger data exploration system. In general, physical interactions were intuitive, informative, and enjoyable, paving the way for new explorations in physical data visualizations.
Supplemental Material
- Alexander, J., Lucero, A., & Subramanian, S. (2012). Tilt displays: designing display surfaces with multi-axis tilting and actuation. In Proc. MobileHCI, pp. 161--170. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Brehmer, M. and Munzner, T. (2013). A multi-level typology of abstract visualization tasks. Visualization and Computer Graphics, IEEE Transactions on 19, 12, pp. 2376--2385. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Brown, C. and Hurst, A. (2012). VizTouch: automatically generated tactile visualizations of coordinate spaces. In Proc. TEI, pp. 131--138. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Card, S.K., Mackinlay, J.D., and Shneiderman, B. (1999). Readings in Information Visualization: Using Vision to Think. Morgan Kaufmann Pub. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Coelho, M., Ishii, H., & Maes, P. (2008). Surflex: a programmable surface for the design of tangible interfaces. In CHI'08 EA, pp. 3429--3434. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Follmer, S., Leithinger, D., and Ishii, A.O.A.H.H. (2013). inFORM: dynamic physical affordances and constraints through shape and object actuation. In Proc. UIST, pp. 417--426. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Fritz, J. P., & Barner, K. E. (1999). Design of a haptic data visualization system for people with visual impairments. IEEE Transactions on Rehabilitation Engineering, 7(3), pp. 372--384.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Greenberg, S. and Buxton, B. Usability evaluation considered harmful (some of the time). (2008). In Proc. CHI, pp. 111--120. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hardy, J., Ellis, C., Alexander, J., & Davies, N. (2013). Ubi Displays: A Toolkit for the Rapid Creation of Interactive Projected Displays. In The International Symposium on Pervasive Displays.Google Scholar
- Harrison, C., & Hudson, S. E. (2009). Providing dynamically changeable physical buttons on a visual display. In Proc. CHI, pp. 299--308. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Heer, J. and Shneiderman, B. (2012). Interactive Dynamics for Visual Analysis. Commun. ACM 55, 4, pp. 45--54. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hornbæk, K. Some Whys and Hows of Experiments in Human-Computer Interaction. (2013). Foundations and Trends in HCI 5, 4, pp. 299--373. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Huron, S., Jansen, Y., and Carpendale, S. Constructing Visual Representations: Investigating the Use of Tangible Tokens. (2014). IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 20, 12, 1.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Iwata, H., Yano, H., Nakaizumi, F., and Kawamura, R. (2001). Project FEELEX: adding haptic surface to graphics. In Proc. SIGGRAPH, pp. 469--476. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jansen, Y., Dragicevic, P., and Fekete, J.-D. (2013). Evaluating the Efficiency of Physical Visualizations. In Proc. CHI. pp. 2593--2602. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jansen, Y. and Dragicevic, P. (2013). An Interaction Model for Visualizations Beyond The Desktop. Visualization and Computer Graphics, IEEE Transactions on 19, 12, pp. 2396--2405. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kyung, K.-U., Lim, J.M., Lim, Y.-A., et al. (2011). TAXEL: Initial progress toward self-morphing visiohaptic interface. IEEE World Haptics, pp. 37--42.Google Scholar
- Lederman, S.J. and Campbell, J.I. (1982). Tangible graphs for the blind. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 24, 1, pp. 85-- 100.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Lee, B., Isenberg, P., Riche, N.H., and Carpendale, S. (2012). Beyond Mouse and Keyboard: Expanding Design Considerations for Information Visualization Interactions. Visualization and Computer Graphics, IEEE Transactions on 18, 12, pp. 2689--2698. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Leithinger, D., Follmer, S., Olwal, A., et al. (2013). Sublimate: state-changing virtual and physical rendering to augment interaction with shape displays. In Proc. CHI, pp. 1441--1450. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Leithinger, D. and Ishii, H. (2010). Relief: a scalable actuated shape display. In Proc TEI pp. 221--222. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Leithinger, D., Lakatos, D., DeVincenzi, A., Blackshaw, M., and Ishii, H. (2011). Direct and gestural interaction with relief: a 2.5 D shape display. Proceedings of the 24th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology, pp. 541--548. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Manshad, M.S., Pontelli, E., and Manshad, S.J. (2012). Trackable interactive multimodal manipulatives: towards a tangible user environment for the blind. In Proceedings of the 13th international conference on Computers Helping People with Special Needs - Volume Part II, Springer-Verlag, pp. 664--671. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Moere, A.V. (2008). Beyond the tyranny of the pixel: Exploring the physicality of information visualization. Information Visualisation, pp. 469--474. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Paneels, S., & Roberts, J. C. (2010). Review of Designs for Haptic Data Visualization. IEEE Transactions on Haptics, 3(2), pp. 119--137. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Perkins, C. (2002). Cartography: progress in tactile mapping. Progress in Human Geography 26, 4, pp. 521--530.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Poupyrev, I., Nashida, T., Maruyama, S., Rekimoto, J., and Yamaji, Y. (2004). Lumen: interactive visual and shape display for calm computing. ACM SIGGRAPH Emerging technologies, 17. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Rasmussen, M.K., Pedersen, E.W., Petersen, M.G., and Hornbæk, K. Shape-changing interfaces: a review of the design space and open research questions. In Proc. CHI, pp. 735--744. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Rohit Ashok Khot, Larissa Hjorth, and Florian "Floyd" Mueller. (2014). Understanding Physical Activity through 3D Printed Material Artifacts. In Proc. CHI. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Roudaut, A., Karnik, A., Löchtefeld, M., and Subramanian, S. (2013). Morphees: Toward High "Shape Resolution" in Self-Actuated Flexible Mobile Devices. In Proc. CHI. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Shah, P. and Hoeffner, J. (2002). Review of graph comprehension research: Implications for instruction. Educational Psychology Review 14, 1, 47--69.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Shneiderman, B. (1996). The eyes have it: A task by data type taxonomy for information visualizations. In Proc. IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages, pp. 336-- 343. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Spence, I. (1990). Visual psychophysics of simple graphical elements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 16, 4, pp. 683--692.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Stusak, S., & Aslan, A. (2014). Beyond physical bar charts: an exploration of designing physical visualizations. In CHI'14 EA, pp. 1381--1386. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Stusak, S., Tabard, A., Sauka, F., Khot, R., & Butz, A. (2014). Activity Sculptures: Exploring the Impact of Physical Visualizations on Running Activity. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 99, 1.Google Scholar
- Tversky, B., Morrison, J.B., and Betrancourt, M. (2002). Animation: can it facilitate? International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 57, 4, pp. 247--262. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Tversky, B. (2001). Spatial schemas in depictions. Spatial schemas and abstract thought, pp. 79--111.Google Scholar
- Wall, S.A. and Brewster, S. (2006). Sensory substitution using tactile pin arrays: Human factors, technology and applications. Signal Processing 86, 12, pp. 3674--3695. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Wobbrock, J. O., Morris, M. R., & Wilson, A. D. (2009). User-defined gestures for surface computing. In Proc. CHI, pp. 1083--1092). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Zacks, J., Levy, E., Tversky, B., and Schiano, D.J. (1998). Reading bar graphs: Effects of extraneous depth cues and graphical context. Journal of Experimental Psychology Applied 4, pp. 119--138.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Zacks, J. and Tversky, B. (1999). Bars and lines: A study of graphic communication. Memory & Cognition 27, 6, pp. 1073--1079.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Zhao, J. and Moere, A.V. (2008). Embodiment in data sculpture: a model of the physical visualization of information. Proc. DIMEA, pp. 343--350. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
Exploring Interactions with Physically Dynamic Bar Charts
Recommendations
Opportunities and Challenges for Data Physicalization
CHI '15: Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsPhysical representations of data have existed for thousands of years. Yet it is now that advances in digital fabrication, actuated tangible interfaces, and shape-changing displays are spurring an emerging area of research that we call Data ...
Beyond physical bar charts: an exploration of designing physical visualizations
CHI EA '14: CHI '14 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing SystemsPhysical visualizations only recently started to attract attention from the InfoVis and HCI communities. They are well known to encourage playful exploration and to stimulate curiosity, but are also considered to support analytical information ...
Pixel bar charts: a visualization technique for very large multi-attribute data sets
Simple presentation graphics are intuitive and easy-to-use, but show only highly aggregated data presenting only a very small number of data values (as in the case of bar charts) and may have a high degree of overlap occluding a significant portion of ...
Comments