Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

skip to main content
10.1145/1012551.1012563acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesapgvConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

Perceptual invariance of nonlinear Focus+Context transformations

Published: 07 August 2004 Publication History

Abstract

Focus+Context techniques are commonly used in visualization systems to simultaneously provide both the details and the context of a particular dataset. This paper proposes a new methodology to empirically investigate the effect of various Focus+Context transformations on human perception. This methodology is based on the shaker paradigm, which tests performance for a visual task on an image that is rapidly alternated with a transformed version of itself. An important aspect of this technique is that it can determine two different kinds of perceptual cost: (i) the effect on the perception of a static transformed image, and (ii) the effect of the dynamics of the transformation itself. This technique has been successfully applied to determine the extent to which human perception is invariant to scaling and rotation [Rensink 2004]. In this paper, we extend this approach to examine nonlinear fisheye transformations of the type typically used in a Focus+Context system. We show that there exists a no-cost zone where performance is unaffected by an abrupt, noticeable fisheye transformation, and that its extent can be determined. The lack of perceptual cost in regards to these sudden changes contradicts the belief that they are necessarily detrimental to performance, and suggests that smoothly animated transformations between visual states are not always necessary. We show that this technique also can map out low-cost zones where transformations result in only a slight degradation of performance. Finally, we show that rectangular grids have no positive effect on performance, acting only as a form of visual clutter. These results therefore demonstrate that the perceptual costs of nonlinear transformations can be successfully quantified. Interestingly, they show that some kinds of sudden transformation can be experienced with minimal or no perceptual cost. This contradicts the belief that sudden changes are necessarily detrimental to performance, and suggests that smoothly animated transformations between visual states are not always necessary.

References

[1]
BEDERSON, B. B., CLAMAGE, A., CZERWINSKI, M. P., AND ROBERTSON, G. G. 2004. DateLens: A Fisheye Calendar Interface for PDAs. Trans. Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI) 11, 1 (March), 90--119.
[2]
BENNETT, D. J. 2002. Evidence for a Pre-Match 'Mental Translation' on a Form-Matching Task. Journal of Vision 12, 50.
[3]
BUNDESEN, C., AND LARSON, A. 1975. Visual Transformation of Size. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1, 214--220.
[4]
CARPENDALE, M. S. T., AND MONTAGNESE, C. 2001. A Framework for Unifying Presentation Space. In Proc. Symp. User Interface Software and Technology (UIST), ACM, 61--70.
[5]
CARPENDALE, M. S. T., COWPERTHWAITE, D. J., AND FRACCHIA, F. D. 1995. 3-Dimensional Pliable Surfaces: for the Effective Presentation of Visual Information. In Proc. Symp. User Interface Software and Technology (UIST), ACM, 217--226.
[6]
CUTTING, J. E. 1987. Rigidity in Cinema Seen from the Front Row, Side Aisle. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 13, 323--334.
[7]
CUTTING, J. E. 1991. On the Efficacy of Cinema, or What the Visual System did not Evolve to Do. London: Taylor & Francis, 486--495.
[8]
FURNAS, G. W. 1986. Generalized Fisheye Views. In Proc. SIGCHI, ACM, 18--23.
[9]
GUTWIN, C., AND FEDAK, C. 2004. A Comparison of Fisheye Lenses for Interactive Layout Tasks. In Proc. Graphics Interface 2004.
[10]
GUTWIN, C., AND FEDAK, C. 2004. Interacting with Big Interfaces on Small Screens: a Comparison of Fisheye, Zoom, and Panning Techniques. In Proc. Graphics Interface.
[11]
GUTWIN, C., AND SKOPIK, A. 2003. Fisheyes are Good for Large Steering Tasks. In Proc. SIGCHI, ACM, 201--208.
[12]
GUTWIN, C. 2002. Improving Focus Targeting in Interactive Fisheye Views. In Proc. SIGCHI, ACM, 267--274.
[13]
HORNBAEK, K., BEDERSON, B., AND PLAISANT, C. 2002. Navigation Patterns and Usability of Zoomable User Interfaces with and without an Overview. Trans. Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI) 9, 4, 362--389.
[14]
KEAHEY, T. A., AND ROBERTSON, E. L. 1996. Techniques for Non-Linear Magnification Transformations. In Proc. Symposium on Information Visualization (InfoVis), IEEE, 38--45.
[15]
KEAHEY, T. A., AND ROBERTSON, E. L. 1997. Nonlinear Magnification Fields. In Proc. Symposium on Information Visualization (Info Vis), IEEE, 38--45.
[16]
KOBSA, A. 2003. User Experiments with Tree Visualization Systems Technical Report. Tech. Rep. UCI-ISR-03-11, University of California Irvine Department of Computer Science.
[17]
LAMPING, J., RAO, R., AND PIROLLI, P. 1995. A Focus+Content Technique Based on Hyperbolic Geometry for Viewing Large Hierarchies. In Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'95), ACM, 401--408.
[18]
LEUNG, Y. K., AND APPERLEY, M. D. 1994. A Review and Taxonomy of Distortion-Oriented Presentation Techniques. Trans. Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI) 1, 2 (June), 126--160.
[19]
MUNZNER, T., GUIMBRETIERE, F., TASIRAN, S., ZHANG, L., AND ZHOU, Y. 2003. TreeJuxtaposer: Scalable Tree Comparison using Focus+Context with Guaranteed Visibility. In Proc. SIGGRAPH 2003, published as Transactions on Graphics, vol. 22, ACM, 453--462.
[20]
MUNZNER, T. 1997. H3: Laying Out Large Directed Graphs in 3D Hyperbolic Space. In Proc. Symposium on Information Visualization (InfoVis), IEEE, 2--10.
[21]
RAO, R., AND CARD, S. K. 1994. The Table Lens: Merging Graphical and Symbolic Representations in an Interactive Focus+Context Visualization for Tabular Information. In Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'94), ACM, 318--322.
[22]
RENSINK, R. A. 2000. The Dynamic Representation of Scenes. Visual Cognition 7, 17--42.
[23]
RENSINK, R. A. 2004. The Invariance of Visual Search to Geometric Transformation. Journal of Vision 4. {Vision Sciences Society, Sarasota, FL, USA. May 2004.}.
[24]
RISDEN, K., CZERWINSKI, M. P., MUNZNER, T., AND COOK, D. 2000. An Initial Examination of Ease of Use for 2D and 3D Information Visualizations of Web Content. International Journal of Human Computer Studies 53, 5 (November), 695--714.
[25]
ROBERTSON, G. G., AND MACKINLAY, J. D. 1993. The Document Lens. In Proc. Symp. User Interface Software and Technology (UIST), ACM, 101--108.
[26]
ROBERTSON, G. G., CARD, S. K., AND MACKINALAY, J. D. 1989. The Cognitive Coprocessor Architecture for Interactive User Interfaces. In Proc. Symp. User Interface Software and Technology (UIST), ACM, 10--18.
[27]
SARKAR, M., AND BROWN, M. H. 1994. Graphical fisheye views, Communications of the ACM 37, 12 (Dec.), 73--84.
[28]
SARKAR, M., SNIBBE, S. S., TVERSKY, O. J., AND REISS, S. P. 1993. Stretching the Rubber Sheet: A Metaphor for Viewing Large Layouts on Small Screens. In Proc. Symp. User Interface Software and Technology (UIST), ACM, 81--91.
[29]
SCHAFFER, D., ZUO, Z., GREENBERG, S., BARTRAM, L., DILL, J., DUBS, S., AND ROSEMAN, M. 1996. Navigating Hierarchically Clustered Networks through Fisheye and Full-Zoom Methods. Trans. Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI) 3, 2 (June), 162--188.
[30]
SHEPARD, R. N., AND METZLER, J. 1971. Mental Rotation of Three-Dimensional Objects. Science 171, 701--703.
[31]
TARR, M. J., AND PINKER, S. 1989. Mental Rotation and Orientation-Dependence in Shape Recognition. Cognitive Psychology 21, 233--282.
[32]
TREISMAN, A., AND GORMICAN, S. 1988. Feature Analysis in Early Vision: Evidence from Search Asymmetries. Psychological Review 95, 15--48.
[33]
TREISMAN, A. 1985. Preattentive Processing in Vision. Computer Vision, Graphics, and Image Processing 31, 156--177.
[34]
WARE, C. 2000. Information Visualization: Perception for Design. Morgan Kaufmann/Academic Press.
[35]
ZHANG, J. 1991. The Interaction of Internal and External Representations in a Problem Solving Task. Proc. Thirteenth Annual Conference of Cognitive Science Society.

Cited By

View all
  • (2021)Experimental Study on the Effect of Zooming Feature on Visual Perception2021 7th International Conference on Control, Automation and Robotics (ICCAR)10.1109/ICCAR52225.2021.9463479(251-255)Online publication date: 23-Apr-2021
  • (2006)Effects of 2D geometric transformations on visual memoryProceedings of the 3rd symposium on Applied perception in graphics and visualization10.1145/1140491.1140515(119-126)Online publication date: 28-Jul-2006

Recommendations

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
APGV '04: Proceedings of the 1st Symposium on Applied perception in graphics and visualization
August 2004
184 pages
ISBN:1581139144
DOI:10.1145/1012551
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 07 August 2004

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. Focus+Context
  2. fisheye transformations
  3. information visualization
  4. visual representation
  5. visual search

Qualifiers

  • Article

Conference

APGV04
Sponsor:

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 19 of 33 submissions, 58%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)2
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1
Reflects downloads up to 12 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2021)Experimental Study on the Effect of Zooming Feature on Visual Perception2021 7th International Conference on Control, Automation and Robotics (ICCAR)10.1109/ICCAR52225.2021.9463479(251-255)Online publication date: 23-Apr-2021
  • (2006)Effects of 2D geometric transformations on visual memoryProceedings of the 3rd symposium on Applied perception in graphics and visualization10.1145/1140491.1140515(119-126)Online publication date: 28-Jul-2006

View Options

Get Access

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media