An Overview of Parliamentary Information Visualization (PIV) Initiatives: Assessing their Completeness and Contribution to Parliamentary Openness

CeDEM14 International Conference for E-Democracy and Open Government 2014 Danube University Krems, 21.05.2014 - 23.05.2014 An Overview of Parliamentary Information Visualization (PIV) Initiatives: Assessing their Completeness and Contribution to Parliamentary Openness Aspasia Papaloi*, Dimitris Gouscos** *PhD Candidate, Laboratory of New Technologies in Communication, Education and the Mass Media, Faculty of Communication and Media Studies, University of Athens, Greece, apapaloi@media.uoa.gr **Assistant Professor, Laboratory of New Technologies in Communication, Education and the Mass Media, Faculty of Communication and Media Studies, University of Athens, Greece, gouscos@media.uoa.gr Abstract: The need for provision of parliamentary information in a simple, systematic and organized way as a corollary of the constant appeal for parliamentary openness by the civil society have paved the way for Parliamentary Information Visualization. Independent organizations and researchers, volunteers, not-for-profit initiatives have deployed Information Visualization methods to visually represent the activity and votes of parliamentarians, particular legislative proposals or legislative texts. These initiatives are quite interesting and at the same time challenging, taking into account the various technical and design requirements, the distinct nature of parliamentary procedure, the availability of parliamentary information, as well as the explanation of parliamentary information and possible engagement of users. This empirical study examines in depth these initiatives, sheds light on several aspects regarding their completeness and evaluates them in terms of their contribution to Parliamentary Openness and subsequent legislative transparency. Keywords: Parliamentary Information Visualization (PIV), Parliamentary Openness, legislative transparency, PIV completeness, engagement Introduction V isualizing or mapping data has become a new and popular trend for independent designers and researchers, companies, not-for-profit organizations as well as governmental bodies. Visualizations enable the visual depiction of data, information or events in a compact, simple and comprehensible way, using a wide choice of methods. Card, Mackinlay & Shneiderman (1999) describe Information Visualization (IV) as “the use of computer-supported, interactive, visual representations of abstract data to amplify cognition” (p. 7). Additionally, Meadows (2003) distinguishes among three forms of interactivity, namely the “acquiring of information, discovering additional information, and facilitating the distribution of that information among multiple people” (p. 121). Schrage (2013) goes a step further into interaction; he draws the attention to viewing visualizations “as interfaces to human interactions CeDEM14 International Conference for E-Democracy and Open Government 2014 Danube University Krems, 21.05.2014 - 23.05.2014 that create new opportunities for new value creation” and not just “as a medium that substitutes pictures for words” (para.10). These definitions are quite interesting when the discussion involves the visual representation of parliamentary information (Parliamentary Information Visualization-PIV). The large amount of information concerning Parliamentary Informatics (PI), i.e. text of legislation, information on individual legislators, specific legislative proposals, votes thereon (Wikipedia, n.d.), needs to be transmitted to the public in such a manner so that viewers can gain knowledge and be provided with the ability to interact through distribution and exchange of information. What is more, empowering them to use this information for action both inside or outside a digital context is a potential that paves the way for legislative transparency and accountability. The Declaration on Parliamentary Openness and, in our opinion a breakthrough of the IPU Guidelines for Parliamentary Websites (2009)1 intends to increase openness and transparency in terms of legislative bodies and enhance citizen engagement in parliamentary work. It encompasses all the possible aspects for the achievement of Parliamentary Openness ranging from the provision, access and usability of information related to parliamentary work, to e-services, ICT tools and all the involved stakeholders such as Members of Parliament, parliamentary personnel and administration, media and civil society. Additionally, accessibility and usability characteristics related to the technical, cognitive and social requirements of IV seem to be convergent to those of the Declaration. The present study aims to examine 19 PIV initiatives that visually represent information regarding several areas of concern on PI. Due to the extensive sample of our research the present study presents both a quantitative and qualitative analysis of the findings. The first part of the research focuses on the presentation of findings based on the characteristics of the PIV initiatives (Section 2). The second part proposes a framework that will be further used to assess the completeness of the PIV initiatives (Section 3). The last section discusses the overall findings in order to assess the completeness of PIV initiatives. Finally, a number of PIV initiatives are distinguished as best practices due to their completeness. PIV Initiatives at the service of Parliamentary Informatics Methodology The study on 19 PIV initiatives has been undertaken during July and August 2013. 22 initiatives have been examined in total. However, 3 of them are not encompassed in our study; 2 of them refer to the judicial branch or elections and the third one actually does not visualize information in a graphical way deploying the existing visualization methods. The research involved three different phases. As far as the methodology is concerned the analysis of the aggregated data for each PIV initiative was based on checklists for all the stages of the research. The rating system for estimating the completeness of the examined PIV initiatives stems from a number of criteria set by Dörk, Feng, Collins & Carpendale (2013) and how these are encompassed by the PIV initiatives. 1 IPU Guidelines on Parliamentary Websites is a recommendation guide for the facilitation of parliamentary website designers and developers. Accessible: http://www.ipu.org/PDF/publications/webe.pdf CeDEM14 International Conference for E-Democracy and Open Government 2014 Danube University Krems, 21.05.2014 - 23.05.2014 This evaluation is based on our personal point of view as users and also recognizes the limitations of language in understanding, interpreting and further exploring some information and metadata contained in the visualizations. The first phase of the research involved the gathering of the PIV initiatives. The documentation covered facets such as the enabler’s status (NGOs, governmental, individual enablers), country they refer to, project scale and type of parliament (regional, national, federal, European) where applicable, methods of visualization, deployment characteristics and scope. A tabular overview of the aggregated PIV initiatives and the most significant aspects of this classification are presented in Annex I in order to provide readers with a better understanding. The second phase of data elaboration included the compilation of a checklist in order to record for each examined PIV initiative all the kinds of visualization methods that correspond to each area of PI. Scope of this classification is: (i) to locate the frequency of the used methods for informing the audience in general, and (ii) to discover the most commonly used visualization methods for each area of PI. The third and final stage of the research goes a step further attempting to evaluate the completeness of the examined PIV initiatives based on the existing literature and setting a number of criteria as proposed in the theoretical framework. A checklist has been compiled for this purpose in order to ascertain, which of the five features (connection, disclosure, plurality, contingency and empowerment) and their characteristics correspond to the PIV initiatives. An overview of PIV initiatives and initial findings on visualization methods The examined initiatives were created either by independent and not-for-profit organizations or private companies and individual researchers. As far as the PI is concerned, there has been an adaptation to the four principle areas of concern encompassing: (i) additional aspects such as Senators, MEPs, political groups and Member States (MS) as well as dimensions of the activity, behaviour and performance of individuals or political groups (‘individual legislators’ area); (ii) the general legislative procedure and means of parliamentary control indicating the actions of MPs/MEPs etc., the number of different legislative documents or actions used for the legislative procedure as well as the status of a legislative document during the legislative procedure as far as the particular legislative proposals are concerned; (iii) different types of voting (voice vote, roll-call votes), as well as other aspects related to voting (missed votes percentage, vote distribution etc.) addressed to MPs/MEPs, Senators, political groups, MS countries; and (iv) the change of a legislative text (already as an enacted law) over time by giving details such as additions, removals, modifications regarding an article or a sentence. This area of concern (‘text of legislation’) also covers the words that have been mentioned or used by legislators or political groups focusing on several aspects (frequency, popularity etc.). The adapted classification of PI areas of concern indicates not only the complexity of the parliamentary function but also highlights the possibilities in terms of PIV initiatives regarding data combination and visual representation using a variety of visualization methods. In particular, the majority of PIV initiatives focuses on the visual representation of characteristics, personal data, attendance, activity, behaviour and performance of MPs, MEPs, political groups or member-state countries. On the other hand, only a small percentage of PIV initiatives (5 out of 19 initiatives) CeDEM14 International Conference for E-Democracy and Open Government 2014 Danube University Krems, 21.05.2014 - 23.05.2014 focuses on the visual representation of particular legislative proposals or actions of MPs, MEPs etc. based on the means of parliamentary control. With regard to the visualization methods that have been observed in general, bar charts, pie charts, line charts, timelines, tables, scatterplots, data maps, word clouds and tree maps are the most common. The ‘individual legislators’ area of concern uses bar charts; tables and pie charts as the preferred methods to visually represent information related to characteristics of this grouping. A noteworthy feature is the use of timeline with other visualization methods such as area chart, histogram, line chart, scatterplot. Despite the small scale use of these methods, this is an interesting dimension for this area of PI. Tables is the method used by the majority of ‘particular legislative proposals, while bar charts, pie charts and area charts is the most common visualization method for ‘votes’. Finally, wordcloud appears to be the most common practice for the visual representation regarding ‘text of legislation’. Moreover, the variety and number of visualization methods deployed for each PIV initiative, the focus on many areas of concern regarding Parliamentary Informatics or the visualization of as much as possible information, do not necessarily render a PIV initiative successful. Reinforcing this argument, Kosara (2013) mentions characteristically that, for instance, “the seemingly simple choice between a bar and a line chart has implications on how we perceive the data” (para.10); moreover, “findings and distinctions in visualization can be subtle, but they can have a profound impact on how well we can read the information and how we interpret it” (ibid.para.12). This is also the case of the timelines in conjunction with other visualization methods. Different methods as well as the selection of different time variables such as ‘time points vs. time intervals’, ‘linear, cyclic or branching structure of time’, ‘static vs. dynamic representations’ (Aigner, Miksch, Müller, Schumann, Tominski, 2007) and others can provide different interpretations and results to the viewers. Wordclouds are another interesting visualization method when enablers try to visually represent text. These are the cases of ‘Nupubliek’, ‘Nos Députés’, ‘Nos Sénateurs’, ‘Congressspeaks’ and ‘Folketsting’ that depict “statistical and semantic attributes such as the frequency and context of individual words and the combinations of words into topics or themes” (Wise, Thomas, Pennock, Lantrip, Pottier, Schur, Crow, 1995, p. 52). On the contrary, there is an exception to this rule with the ‘Capitolwords’ initiative deploying a timeline method in conjunction with parallel coordinates to combine words into topics or themes. Setting criteria for PIV completeness The previous discussion showed that there is a variety of visualization methods implemented by each PIV initiative and each area of concern on PI. For this reason, the current study furthermore attempts to assess the completeness of PIV initiatives based on a critical approach of Information Visualization proposed by Dörk, Feng, Collins & Carpendale (2013) for the examined PIV initiatives. This theoretical framework encompasses four principles such as disclosure, plurality, contingency and empowerment (ibid., para.16). Dörk et al. (2013) also claim that “the main aim of engaging visualizations is to make a connection between the viewer and an issue” (ibid., para. 39). For this reason, the present study encompasses connection as an additional principle. The selection of this classification, although not an authoritative one, “but rather a starting point for exploring issues of power in visualization” (ibid., para.16), suits the present study because it enables a CeDEM14 International Conference for E-Democracy and Open Government 2014 Danube University Krems, 21.05.2014 - 23.05.2014 holistic approach of the aspects related to a PIV initiative: (i) user engagement and empowerment, (ii) enabler aspirations, and (iii) aspects related to the visualization method.      Connection is the most crucial principle for a visualization, linking the issue with the viewer (Dörk et al.). If an issue is not engaging to the viewer, then the viewer will not proceed to understand and explore the visualization. This principle encompasses the following techniques for the needs of our study: “high-level view and a broad perspective of the visualization(s)”; “provision of a map for the connection with the viewer’s world”; “invitation for shaping the visualization”; “personal connection via biographical information” (ibid., para. 41, 42, 44) particularly about MPs; Disclosure encompasses the designers’ aspirations on the potential effects of the visualization. These effects invite “the viewer into exchanges with the designer, reflections about the visualization, and engagement with an issue” (Dörk et al., para.17). In particular, “description of designers’/creators’ aspirations for the potential effects of the visualization”; “invitation of the viewer for the exchange of views with the designers as well as reflections about the visualization”; “information about the goal of the exploration”; “accompanying articles and background information for the intent behind the project” as well as “the ability of the viewer to comprehend the reasons of the generated issues” are the techniques used for the evaluation of the examined PIV initiatives as adapted for the needs of the current study; Plurality implies not only the exposure of the multiple aspects regarding visualizations but also the variety of the interpretations (Dörk et al., para.18). This principle includes techniques such as the “perspectives that are emphasized or hidden”; the provision of facets for the exploration of statistical and personal information “allowing the viewer to approach the information at different levels”. Dörk et al. (2013) explain in the case of emphasized or hidden perspectives that “it is feasible to expose marginal, unconventional, and challenging angles of an issue to help the viewer to reflect their own assumptions. There may be situations in which the visualization designer deliberatively chooses to advocate a specific standpoint instead of offering a nuanced set of perspectives” (para. 18); Contingency implies the technical and operational provision of “flexible visualizations” that do not lead to “pre-determined conclusions” but rather engage viewers more deeply with a given issue and relate it to their life”, enable them “for more unique and profound experiences and insights” (Dörk et al., para.19). Contingency indicates the element of the unexpected and the uncertainty in the visualization. The question that has to be answered in our study is if “it is possible to design a visualization that acknowledges the situation of the viewer in relation to the phenomenon being represented”(ibid., para. 19); Empowerment is the end result and scope of a successful visualization, i.e. it enables “visualization creators to let their voice be heard and perspective be seen”; permits “viewers to question visual representations, utilize them to tell their own story, and shift from awareness to action”; “help people interact with one another, and make linkages across different backgrounds and connect visualizations with actual civic engagement” (Dörk et al., para.20). At the same time, the designer has to take into account impediments in terms of the viewers, such as their different background, literacy issues or access to technology, “perceptual abilities, gender, and other forms of oppression” (ibid., para.20). For the needs of this study, the empowering character of the PIV initiatives is evaluated CeDEM14 International Conference for E-Democracy and Open Government 2014 Danube University Krems, 21.05.2014 - 23.05.2014 based on the following: ability to add comments and links; ability of subscription for following up specific areas of the platform; possibility to print and forward by e-mail the provided information; sharing in social media; access of data programmatically; references to other links which are related to the main theme; creation of links and visualizations by the user. Findings on PIV completeness The abovementioned framework serves as a good guide for the completeness assessment regarding the documented PIV initiatives. Having in mind: (i) our intention to focus impartially on the completeness of the PIV initiatives, (ii) the fact that our point of view as users may be subjective in some cases regarding the perception and further exploration of the visualizations’ context, and (iii) the limitations in encompassing all the aspects of each examined visualization, following conclusions have been extracted: The techniques encompassed in the connection principle prove that the majority of PIV initiatives offer a high-level view and broad perspective of the visualizations via their home page. The use of maps in these initiatives in order to connect with the viewers’ world is encountered in 7 of them. This fact relies on the enablers’ disposition on how they want to attract the viewer (in the cases of the ‘Nos Députés’ and ‘Nos Sénateurs’) but also in the case of the initiatives that are addressed to countries with a federal system (U.S.A., Germany). With regard to personal connection by providing MPs’ personal information, most of the cases focus directly on the visualization based on the respective PI areas of concern. Furthermore, only a few initiatives provide a personal connection to biographical information of MPs through a link redirecting either to their websites or to their social media profiles. Similarly, only a few of them invite users to shape the visualization. The disclosure principle provides satisfactory results for all of the five characteristics. The enablers have developed the part of providing information on their aspirations and provide communication channels to contact with the users. However, only 1 of the examined initiatives explains in detail the use of the selected visualization methods and their scope. Accompanying articles and background information are provided by almost all the initiatives. Similarly, the majority of initiatives allow viewers to comprehend the reasons for the views generated except for one that redirects to an external link. As regards plurality, the majority of the PIV initiatives enable users to see perspectives that are emphasized or hidden, such as characteristic words spoken in debates, performance since the beginning of the parliamentary term, loyalty or rebellion from a political party. In the same manner, the provision of facets for the exploration of statistical and personal information is ensured. A characteristic example is that of the U.S. Congress Members (GovTrack.us). In particular, the enablers via the contribution of scatterplots focus on emphasizing angles of Members of Congress behaviour in order to show the frequency of cosponsorship in bills (leadership score) (Govtrack.us, 2013, para.1), as well as cosponsorhip of similar sets of bills among them (ideology score) (Govtrack.us, 2013, para.2). In terms of the visualizations’ contingency, several methods are deployed, while results may vary. For example, the use of tables – which is the most common visualization method for the majority of PIV initiatives – is not always applicable, effective and comprehensible to the user. In CeDEM14 International Conference for E-Democracy and Open Government 2014 Danube University Krems, 21.05.2014 - 23.05.2014 some cases tables provide useful insights, whereas in others toggling between several variables without further explanation on their use may be confusing to the user and impede further exploration and use. Similarly, in the case of scatterplots the results are diverse. In one case, useful insights are offered to the viewer via background documents and redirection to relevant scientific articles not only on the use of scatterplots but also on the further exploration of the information regarding MPs’ behaviour or performance. Yet, other initiatives do not provide sufficient information on this method. This results in depriving the user from fully understanding and exploring the given data. The empowerment principle is of utmost importance because it proves the completeness of the initiative connecting it with other contexts, digital or physical. Following results have been derived on this aspect: (i) only 9 out of 19 PIV initiatives provide commenting or embedding links; (ii) 13 initiatives deploy social media in their platforms. However, most of them are related to the enablers’ profiles and not the actual sharing of data or information; (iii) only 2 initiatives provide the possibility to share information of MP votes or user votes compared to those of an MEP on social media; (iv) only 8 initiatives offer subscription for following up specific areas of the platform, only 7 of them offer the print or e-mail possibility of information, whereas 13 of them enable access to data programmatically; (v) only 4 initiatives enable users to create links or visualizations usually by providing free software or embedding links to one’s website. Discussion The examined PIV initiatives reveal significant aspects not only in terms of the visualization methods but also as regards the extent of their completeness and their contribution to parliamentary openness and subsequent legislative transparency. Each initiative shows its originality by visually representing different areas of concern on PI, deploying different visualization methods without any concrete criteria on this selection and achieving different results.   Connection seems to rely on the disposal of each enabler regarding the choice of method to connect or further engage the viewer (map, shaping of visualization, redirection to personal information of MPs etc.). A map is a technique that immediately attracts viewer interest to be further engaged with the initiative and is recommended on a project scale, which involves countries with a federal system or if the enablers want to focus on constituencies. Connection and engagement are even more effective when users are asked to shape the visualization according to their ideas or preferences. For example, when users are called to use their own preferences or variables to shape the visualization or to compare their votes with those of MPs or MEPs, this self-exploration creates the feeling that much more interesting insights are in store for the given visualization. With regard to personal connection via biographical information of MPs, the intention and focus of PIV initiatives seems to be the visual representation of data and information regarding MPs’ activity and performance, Disclosure plays a crucial role for further engagement of the viewers and their subsequent empowerment. The findings have led us to the following observations: (i) whereas a simple visualization method (e.g. pie chart) does not necessitate further explanation, other methods encompassing several variables (e.g. tables, scatterplots, wordclouds, combination CeDEM14 International Conference for E-Democracy and Open Government 2014 Danube University Krems, 21.05.2014 - 23.05.2014    of timeline with another visualization method) require sufficient reasoning on the choice of method, based on the aspirations of the enablers and clarifications via background documents for the function of the chosen method(s); (ii) a well-designed visualization that provides its message with simplicity and immediacy does not always require a detailed explanation. However, it does not always provide further insights or engagement; (iii) a data set containing too much information requires a detailed analysis; (iv) lack of background information on the function of a more complicated visualization method can lead to disengagement at the stage of exploration and failure in empowering the viewer for further action either online or offline, Plurality determines whether there is a variety of interpretations behind the sole visual representation of information and provides the enablers with the ability to focus on several angles of the issue. This is a challenging case in terms of European projects due to the complexity of parliamentary work and procedures, the absence of viewer knowledge on EU or European Commission (EC) document terminology or abbreviations and the additional habituation with the provided visualization method. In other words, instead of letting viewers search among different information or provide them only a variety of different information, it would be preferable to focus on some aspects of an issue. In this case, the provision of supportive material regarding the use of the specific visualization method and the expected outcomes by the enablers can be helpful to non-expert viewers. This is an issue of utmost importance that will be further discussed, Contingency seems to be dependent on several aspects ranging from user perception to enabler choice: (i) to design according to the needs of their audience; (ii) to their ability to faithfully present data; and (iii) to deeply engage their audience with the visualized information. There seems to be a connection between contingency and disclosure as far as the provision of background or supportive information is concerned on the use of the selected visualization methods and the expected outcomes. This fact justifies our previous observations as regard the disclosure principle, as well the findings mentioned above on visualization methods (wordclouds, tables, timelines in combination with other visualization methods). In our opinion, enabler weakness in some cases to focus on a usercentric design and perception, deprives them of the possibility to fully exploiting the benefits of PI visualization, The empowerment principle is crucial not only in terms of the completeness of a PIV initiative but also in terms of enabling viewers to participate both in digital or physical context. The more options for information and participation that a PIV initiative encompasses – both traditional and contemporary - the more inclusive it is. These data signify that the percentage of traditional means of communication is relatively low compared to the means of accessing data programmatically. This percentage is inversely proportional to the number of novice versus qualified users indicating that these initiatives are possibly addressed to a qualified public rather than citizens who intend to get informed on the actual parliamentary work. This argument is also reinforced by the fact that a small percentage of the initiatives focus primary on the technical part with data provision via Application Programming Interfaces (APIs), addressing solely a group of people acquainted with them. The detailed data provided by two initiatives with regard to the user registration and engagement in the platform proves that the number of users commenting on several parliamentary issues is quite low relatively compared to the CeDEM14 International Conference for E-Democracy and Open Government 2014 Danube University Krems, 21.05.2014 - 23.05.2014 number of subscribers. This fact determines that most users visit the platform to get informed and are not actually engaged in an issue. Yet, this remains a point of further research regarding the evaluation of PIV effectiveness by the provided initiatives. In our opinion, the following cases are characterized as best practices due to their completeness: (i) both initiatives addressed to the National Assembly of France and the French Senate (‘Nos Députés’, ‘Nos Sénateurs’); (ii) the initiative addressed to the Italian Chamber (‘Open Parlamento’); and (iii) the one focusing on the European Parliament (‘Votewatch Europe’). All of them seem to engage their users either online or offline. Nevertheless, further research is needed in order to evaluate their effectiveness. Concluding remarks This study on the PIV initiatives has proved their usefulness and their role as mediators between all the interested parties (public, civil society, NGOs, media) and parliaments. Undoubtedly, PIV initiatives can contribute to Parliamentary Openness and pave the way for legislative transparency and accountability to some extent. In particular, by providing information as complete as possible and stating the limitations (e.g. not 100% verified results in votes’ extraction due to absence of voting records in parliamentary websites; not knowing all the aspects on MPs’ absence such as justified absence due to sickness; lack of the appropriate supportive technological tools in terms of the parliaments for the extraction of data); stating the time of data updating (every few hours, daily etc.); the manner of data updating (e.g. scraping of the data through parliamentary websites etc.); providing information on MPs assets, votes etc. or trying to assess their performance indicate the efforts on this direction. For the time being, visualizations fulfil the informative part and in some cases encourage exploration as regards the visualization of several PI areas of concern. This study has revealed that engagement even with the aid of visualizations is a hard to reach task requiring an in depth and constant commitment in terms of the enablers with: the recruitment of teams acquainted with the legislative procedure; the ability to focus on user-centric design of visualizations; the disposal on guiding their audience and explaining the use and the expected outcomes of the deployed visualizations; the provision of both traditional and contemporary means of information sharing; the disposal in motivating viewers and users to be further engaged both online and offline. References Aigner, W., Miksch, S., Müller, W., Schumann, H. & Tominski, C. (2007). Visualizing Time-Oriented Data – A Systematic View. Computers & Graphics, 31(3), 401-409 Card, S.K., Mackinlay, J.D. & Shneiderman, B. (1999). Readings in Information Visualization: Using Vision to Think. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufman Declaration on Parliamentary Openness (2012). Retrieved August 26, 2013, from http://www.openingparliament.org Dörk, M., Feng, P., Collins, C. & Carpendale, S. (2013). Critical InfoVis: Exploring the Politics of Visualization. In alt.chi 2013: Extended Abstracts of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Retrieved September 1, 2013, from http://vialab.science.uoit.ca/wordpress/wpcontent/papercite-data/pdf/dor2013a.pdf CeDEM14 International Conference for E-Democracy and Open Government 2014 Danube University Krems, 21.05.2014 - 23.05.2014 IPU (2009). Guidelines for Parliamentary Websites. Geneva: Inter-Parliamentary Union Retrieved December 6, 2013, from http://www.ipu.org/PDF/publications/web-e.pdf GovTrack.us. 2013. Leadership Analysis of Members of Congress. Retrieved August 26, 2013, from https://www.govtrack.us/about/analysis. GovTrack.us (2013). Ideology Analysis of Members of Congress. Retrieved August 26, 2013, from https://www.govtrack.us/about/analysis. Kosara, R. (2013, April 11). The Science of What We Do (and Don’t) Know About Data Visualization [Harvard Business Review Blog Network]. Retrieved April 14, 2013, from http://blogs.hbr.org/2013/04/the-science-of-what-we-do-and-dont-know-about-data-visualization/ Meadows, M.S. (2003). Pause & Effect: The Art of Interactive Narrative. Indianapolis: New Riders. Schrage, M. (2013, March 26). The Question All Smart Visualizations Should Ask [Harvard Business Review Blog Network]. Retrieved April 14, 2013, from http://blogs.hbr.org/schrage/2013/03/the-question-allsmart-visualizations.html Wikipedia (n.d.). Parliamentary Informatics. Retrieved July 28, 2013, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliamentary_informatics Wise, J.A., Thomas, J.J., Pennock, K., Lantrip, D., Pottier, M., Schur, A., Crow, V. (1995). Visualizing the NonVisual: Spatial Analysis and Interaction with Information from Text Documents. In INFOVIS ’95 Procceedings of the 1995 IEEE Symposium on Information Visualization, (pp. 51-58). Washighton DC: IEEE Computer Society About the Authors Aspasia Papaloi Aspasia Papaloi is a public servant at the Hellenic Parliament since 2002 with an extensive experience in European and International issues and is currently working in the IT and New Technologies Directorate. She holds a B.A. in German Literature and Language and an MA in ICT Management. She is a research fellow of the Laboratory of New Technologies in Communication, Education and the Mass Media (University of Athens) and her PhD research involves e-parliaments with a special focus on the use of visualizations for the achievement of transparency. Dimitris Gouscos Dimitris Gouscos is Assistant Professor with the Faculty of Communication and Media Studies of the University of Athens and a research fellow of the Laboratory of New Technologies in Communication, Education and the Mass Media, where he contributes to the co-ordination of two research groups on Digital Media for Learning and Digital Media for Participation. His research interests include applications of digital communication in open governance, participatory media, interactive storytelling and playful learning. More details available at: http://www.media.uoa.gr/~gouscos. CeDEM14 International Conference for E-Democracy and Open Government 2014 Danube University Krems, 21.05.2014 - 23.05.2014 Annex I. Parliamentary Information Visualization (PIV) Initiatives Country/ Region 1. USA 2. USA 3. USA PIV initiative/Website Project scale Visualization methods Open States Federal Pie chart http://openstates.org/ GovTrack.us Federal Scatterplot, bar chart, line chart Federal Bar chart, area chart, wordcloud Federal Bar chart, pie chart, timeline and parallel coordinates European Bar chart, area chart, pie chart, timeline, timeline and histogram, wordcloud, table European Table, treemap, bar chart European Bar chart, area chart Federal Area chart Federal, Regional Data map Federal Timeline http://www.govtrack.us CongressSpeaks http://www.congressspeaks.com/ CapitolWords http://capitolwords.org 4. USA 5. EUROPE 6. EUROPE 7. EUROPE VoteWatch Europe http://www.votewatch.eu/ ParlTrack http://parltrack.euwiki.org/ It’s Your Parliament.eu http://www.itsyourparliament.eu/ Namentliche Abstimmungen 8. GERMANY http://www.bundestag.de/bundestag/ple num/abstimmung/index.jsp 9. GERMANY Additional Incomes of Parliamentarians (Nebeneinkünfte) http://vis4.net/labs/nebeneinkuenfte/ 10. GERMANY The Making of a Law (Parteiengesetz) http://visualisiert.net/parteiengesetz/index. en.html Nos Députés 11. FRANCE 12. FRANCE National Bar chart, area chart, pie chart, table, wordcloud, timeline and area chart National Bar chart, pie chart, timeline and area chart, wordcloud http://www.Nos Députés.fr/ Nos Sénateurs http://www.Nos Sénateurs.fr/ CeDEM14 International Conference for E-Democracy and Open Government 2014 Danube University Krems, 21.05.2014 - 23.05.2014 Country/ Region 13. CZECH REPUBLICSLOVAKIA 14. SLOVAKIA 15. DENMARK 16. ITALY 17. LITHUANIA 18. NETHERLANDS 19. SPAIN-BASQUE Visualization methods PIV initiative/Website Project scale Kohovolit http://en.kohovolit.eu/about Regional, national, European Dotankoch National Histogram, pie chart, line chart National Pie chart, wordcloud National Bar chart, pie chart, wordcloud, timeline, table National Bar chart, area chart, pie chart, histogram National Timeline, table, wordcloud Regional Timeline and line chart http://dotankoch.sk/ Folkets Ting Table, timeline and scatterplot http://folketsting.dk/ OpenParlamento http://parlamento16.openpolis.it/ Seime.lt http://seime.lt/ Nupubliek http://www.nupubliek.nl/ Parlio http://parlio.org/ This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Austria License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/at/).