research-article

The Effect of Visual Appearance on the Performance of Continuous Sliders and Visual Analogue Scales

Authors:

Justin Matejka,

Michael Glueck,

George FitzmauriceAuthors Info & Claims

CHI '16: Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

Pages 5421 - 5432

https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858063

Published: 07 May 2016 Publication History

Abstract

Sliders and Visual Analogue Scales (VASs) are input mechanisms which allow users to specify a value within a predefined range. At a minimum, sliders and VASs typically consist of a line with the extreme values labeled. Additional decorations such as labels and tick marks can be added to give information about the gradations along the scale and allow for more precise and repeatable selections. There is a rich history of research about the effect of labelling in discrete scales (i.e., Likert scales), however the effect of decorations on continuous scales has not been rigorously explored. In this paper we perform a 2,000 user, 250,000 trial online experiment to study the effects of slider appearance, and find that decorations along the slider considerably bias the distribution of responses received. Using two separate experimental tasks, the trade-offs between bias, accuracy, and speed-of-use are explored and design recommendations for optimal slider implementations are proposed.

Supplementary Material

ZIP File (pn0240-file4.zip)

pn0240-file4.zip

Download
.63 KB

suppl.mov (pn0240-file3.mp4)

Supplemental video

Download
32.61 MB

References

[1]

Gunnar Borg and Elisabet Borg. 1991. A General Psychophysical Scale of Blackness and Its Possibilities as a Test of Rating Behaviour. Department of Psychology, Stockholm University.

[2]

Lei Chang. 1994. A psychometric evaluation of 4-point and 6-point Likert-type scales in relation to reliability and validity. Applied psychological measurement 18, 3: 205-215.

[3]

C. Connolly and T. Fleiss. 1997. A study of efficiency and accuracy in the transformation from RGB to CIELAB color space. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing 6, 7: 1046-1048. http://doi.org/10.1109/83.597279

Digital Library

[4]

Mick P. Couper, Michael W. Traugott, and Mark J. Lamias. 2001. Web survey design and administration. Public opinion quarterly 65, 2: 230-253.

[5]

Geoff Cumming. 2013. The New Statistics Why and How. Psychological Science: 0956797613504966. http://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613504966

[6]

Geoff Cumming and Sue Finch. 2005. Inference by eye: confidence intervals and how to read pictures of data. The American Psychologist 60, 2: 170-180. http://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.60.2.170

[7]

Thomas J. DiCiccio and Bradley Efron. 1996. Bootstrap confidence intervals. Statistical Science 11, 3: 189-228. http://doi.org/10.1214/ss/1032280214

[8]

Pierre Dragicevic, Fanny Chevalier, and Stephane Huot. 2014. Running an HCI Experiment in Multiple Parallel Universes. CHI '14 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM, 607- 618. http://doi.org/10.1145/2559206.2578881

Digital Library

[9]

John E. Hunter Frank L. Schmidt. 1997. Eight common but false objections to the discontinuation of significance testing in the analysis of research data.

[10]

M. Freyd. 1923. The Graphic Rating Scale. Journal of Educational Psychology 14, 2: 83-102. http://doi.org/10.1037/h0074329

[11]

Frederik Funke and Ulf-Dietrich Reips. 2012. Why Semantic Differentials in Web-Based Research Should Be Made from Visual Analogue Scales and Not from 5-Point Scales. Field Methods 24, 3: 310-327. http://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X12444061

[12]

Joachim Gerich. 2007. Visual analogue scales for mode-independent measurement in self-administered questionnaires. Behavior Research Methods 39, 4: 985-992. http://doi.org/10.3758/BF03192994

[13]

Eric Gilbert. 2014. What if We Ask a Different Question?: Social Inferences Create Product Ratings Faster. Proceedings of the 32Nd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM, 2759-2762. http://doi.org/10.1145/2556288.2557081

Digital Library

[14]

Michael Gleicher, Michael Correll, Christine Nothelfer, and Steven Franconeri. 2013. Perception of Average Value in Multiclass Scatterplots. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 19, 12: 2316-2325. http://doi.org/10.1109/TVCG.2013.183

Digital Library

[15]

G. Ljunggren G Neely. 1992. Comparison between the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and the Category Ratio Scale (CR-10) for the evaluation of leg exertion. International journal of sports medicine 13, 2: 133-6. http://doi.org/10.1055/s-2007--1021244

[16]

Mary HS Hayes and Donald G. Patterson. 1921. Experimental development of the graphic rating method. Psychol Bull 18, 1: 98-9.

[17]

Jeffrey Heer and Michael Bostock. 2010. Crowdsourcing Graphical Perception: Using Mechanical Turk to Assess Visualization Design. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM, 203-212. http://doi.org/10.1145/1753326.1753357

Digital Library

[18]

Marianne Jensen Hjermstad, Peter M. Fayers, Dagny F. Haugen, et al. 2011. Studies Comparing Numerical Rating Scales, Verbal Rating Scales, and Visual Analogue Scales for Assessment of Pain Intensity in Adults: A Systematic Literature Review. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management 41, 6: 1073-1093. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2010.08.016

[19]

E. C. Huskisson. 1974. Measurement of pain. The Lancet 304, 7889: 1127-1131.

[20]

Don A. Dillman Jolene D. Smyth. 2006. Effects of Using Visual Design Principles to Group Response Options in Web Surveys. International Journal of Internet Science.

[21]

Aniket Kittur, Ed H. Chi, and Bongwon Suh. 2008. Crowdsourcing User Studies with Mechanical Turk. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM, 453-456. http://doi.org/10.1145/1357054.1357127

Digital Library

[22]

R. Likert. 1932. A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of Psychology 22 140: 55.

[23]

Dawn M. Marsh-Richard, Erin S. Hatzis, Charles W. Mathias, Nicholas Venditti, and Donald M. Dougherty. 2009. Adaptive Visual Analog Scales (AVAS): A Modifiable Software Program for the Creation, Administration, and Scoring of Visual Analog Scales. Behavior research methods 41, 1: 99-106. http://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.1.99

[24]

Heather M. McCormack, David J. de L Horne, and Simon Sheather. 1988. Clinical applications of visual analogue scales: a critical review. Psychological medicine 18, 04: 1007-1019.

[25]

Hendrik Müller, Aaron Sedley, and Elizabeth Ferrall-Nunge. 2014. Designing Unbiased Surveys for HCI Research. CHI '14 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM, 1027-1028. http://doi.org/10.1145/2559206.2567822

Digital Library

[26]

Gregory Neely. 1995. Properties of a category ratio scale (CR-10) and the visual analogue scale (VAS): a comparison with magnitude estimation, line production, and category scaling. Dept. of Psychology, Stockholm University.

[27]

Bing Pan, Arch G. Woodside, and Fang Meng. 2014. How Contextual Cues Impact Response and Conversion Rates of Online Surveys. Journal of Travel Research 53, 1: 58-68. http://doi.org/10.1177/0047287513484195

[28]

Agnès Paul-Dauphin, Francis Guillemin, Jean-Marc Virion, and Serge Briançon. 1999. Bias and Precision in Visual Analogue Scales: A Randomized Controlled Trial. American Journal of Epidemiology 150, 10: 1117-1127. http://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a009937

[29]

Philip M. Podsakoff, Scott B. MacKenzie, and Nathan P. Podsakoff. 2012. Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of Psychology 63: 539-569. http://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-120710--100452

[30]

Ulf-Dietrich Reips. 2010. Design and formatting in Internet-based research. In Advanced methods for conducting online behavioral research, S. D. Gosling and J. A. Johnson (eds.). American Psychological Association, Washington, DC, US, 29-43.

[31]

Ulf-Dietrich Reips and Frederik Funke. 2008. Intervallevel measurement with visual analogue scales in Internet-based research: VAS Generator. Behavior Research Methods 40, 3: 699-704. http://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.40.3.699

[32]

Joel Ross, Lilly Irani, M. Six Silberman, Andrew Zaldivar, and Bill Tomlinson. 2010. Who Are the Crowdworkers?: Shifting Demographics in Mechanical Turk. CHI '10 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM, 2863-2872. http://doi.org/10.1145/1753846.1753873

Digital Library

[33]

Paul van Schaik and Jonathan Ling. 2003. Using online surveys to measure three key constructs of the quality of human-computer interaction in web sites: psychometric properties and implications. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 59, 5: 545-567. http://doi.org/10.1016/S10715819(03)00078--8

Digital Library

[34]

J. Scott and E. C. Huskisson. 1976. Graphic representation of pain. Pain 2, 2: 175-184.

[35]

Daniel R. Smith and Bruce N. Walker. 2002. Tickmarks, axes, and labels: The effects of adding context to auditory graphs. International Conference on Auditory Display (ICAD). Retrieved March 31, 2015 from https://smartech.gatech.edu/handle/1853/51392

[36]

George W. Torrance, David Feeny, and William Furlong. 2001. Visual Analog Scales Do They Have a Role in the Measurement of Preferences for Health States? Medical Decision Making 21, 4: 329-334.

[37]

Roger Tourangeau, Mick P. Couper, and Frederick Conrad. 2004. Spacing, Position, and Order Interpretive Heuristics for Visual Features of Survey Questions. Public Opinion Quarterly 68, 3: 368-393. http://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfh035

[38]

Li-Jen Weng. 2004. Impact of the Number of Response Categories and Anchor Labels on Coefficient Alpha and Test-Retest Reliability. Educational and Psychological Measurement 64, 6: 956-972. http://doi.org/10.1177/0013164404268674

[39]

SurveyMonkey: Free online survey software & questionnaire tool. Retrieved March 30, 2015 from https://www.surveymonkey.com/

[40]

Google Forms - create and analyze surveys, for free. Retrieved March 30, 2015 from http://www.google.ca/forms/about/

[41]

Amazon Mechanical Turk - Welcome. Retrieved March 30, 2015 from https://www.mturk.com/mturk/welcome

[42]

Beyond Significance Testing: Statistics Reform in the Behavioral Sciences, Second Edition. http://www.apa.org. Retrieved March 25, 2015 from http://www.apa.org/pubs/books/4316151.aspx

Cited By

Wu YStangl ESmith SOleson JMiller CChipara O(2025)Psychometric characteristics and feasibility of microinteraction-based Ecological Momentary Assessment in audiology researchFrontiers in Audiology and Otology10.3389/fauot.2024.15063062Online publication date: 8-Jan-2025
https://doi.org/10.3389/fauot.2024.1506306
Windl MLeusmann JSchmidt AFeger SMayer SKelley PKapadia A(2024)Privacy communication patterns for domestic robotsProceedings of the Twentieth USENIX Conference on Usable Privacy and Security10.5555/3696899.3696906(121-138)Online publication date: 12-Aug-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/3696899.3696906
García-Fernández JCuesta MPostigo ÁMenéndez-Aller ÁGonzález-Nuevo CGarcía-Cueto E(2024)Ítems tipo Likert vs. Ítems continuos: ¿Qué opción es mejor?Revista Internacional de Sociología10.3989/ris.2024.82.2.M23-0482:2(e252)Online publication date: 18-Jun-2024
https://doi.org/10.3989/ris.2024.82.2.M23-04
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

The Effect of Visual Appearance on the Performance of Continuous Sliders and Visual Analogue Scales
1. Human-centered computing

Recommendations

Investigating the Effect of Orientation and Visual Style on Touchscreen Slider Performance
CHI '19: Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

Sliders are one of the most fundamental components used in touchscreen user interfaces (UIs). When entering data using a slider, errors occur due e.g. to visual perception, resulting in inputs not matching what is intended by the user. However, it is ...
Six-DOF vibrations of partial contact sliders in hard disk drives

A six-degree-of-freedom slider dynamic simulator is developed to analyze the slider's motion in the vertical, pitch, roll, yaw, length and width directions. The modified time-dependent Reynolds equation is used to model the air bearing and a new second ...
A Web Experiment Showing Negative Effects of Slider Scales Compared to Visual Analogue Scales and Radio Button Scales

This article provides evidence that there is a substantial difference between slider scales and visual analogue scales VAS, two types of rating scales used in web surveys that are frequently mixed up. In an experimental design, both scales were compared ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

CHI '16: Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

May 2016

6108 pages

ISBN:9781450333627

DOI:10.1145/2858036

General Chairs:
Jofish Kaye
Yahoo
,
Allison Druin
University of Maryland / National Park Service
,
Program Chairs:
Cliff Lampe
University of Michigan
,
Dan Morris
Microsoft
,
Juan Pablo Hourcade
University of Iowa

Copyright © 2016 ACM.

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 the author(s) 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

SIGCHI: ACM Special Interest Group on Computer-Human Interaction

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 07 May 2016

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Badges

Best Paper

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Conference

CHI'16

Sponsor:

SIGCHI

CHI'16: CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

May 7 - 12, 2016

California, San Jose, USA

Acceptance Rates

CHI '16 Paper Acceptance Rate 565 of 2,435 submissions, 23%;

Overall Acceptance Rate 6,199 of 26,314 submissions, 24%

Upcoming Conference

CHI 2025

Sponsor:
sigchi

ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

April 26 - May 1, 2025

Yokohama , Japan

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

76
Total Citations
View Citations
1,618
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)257
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)21

Reflects downloads up to 03 Mar 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Wu YStangl ESmith SOleson JMiller CChipara O(2025)Psychometric characteristics and feasibility of microinteraction-based Ecological Momentary Assessment in audiology researchFrontiers in Audiology and Otology10.3389/fauot.2024.15063062Online publication date: 8-Jan-2025
https://doi.org/10.3389/fauot.2024.1506306
Windl MLeusmann JSchmidt AFeger SMayer SKelley PKapadia A(2024)Privacy communication patterns for domestic robotsProceedings of the Twentieth USENIX Conference on Usable Privacy and Security10.5555/3696899.3696906(121-138)Online publication date: 12-Aug-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/3696899.3696906
García-Fernández JCuesta MPostigo ÁMenéndez-Aller ÁGonzález-Nuevo CGarcía-Cueto E(2024)Ítems tipo Likert vs. Ítems continuos: ¿Qué opción es mejor?Revista Internacional de Sociología10.3989/ris.2024.82.2.M23-0482:2(e252)Online publication date: 18-Jun-2024
https://doi.org/10.3989/ris.2024.82.2.M23-04
Shogren KGerasimova DLachapelle YLussier-Desrochers DHagiwara MPetitpierre GFontana-Lana BPiazza FCourbois YDesbiens AHaelewyck MGeurts HPace JHicks T(2024)Preliminary Reliability and Validity of the Self-Determination Inventory: Student Report French TranslationIntellectual and Developmental Disabilities10.1352/1934-9556-62.5.33962:5(339-353)Online publication date: 25-Sep-2024
https://doi.org/10.1352/1934-9556-62.5.339
Fritz JPiccirillo MCohen ZFrumkin MKirtley OMoeller JNeubauer ANorris LSchuurman NSnippe EBringmann L(2024)So You Want to Do ESM? 10 Essential Topics for Implementing the Experience-Sampling MethodAdvances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science10.1177/251524592412679127:3Online publication date: 27-Sep-2024
https://doi.org/10.1177/25152459241267912
Särchen FSpringborn SMortsiefer AEhlers J(2024)Digital learning about patients: An online survey of German medical students investigating learning strategies for family medical video consultationsDIGITAL HEALTH10.1177/2055207624123007010Online publication date: 5-Feb-2024
https://doi.org/10.1177/20552076241230070
Bemmann FMayer S(2024)The Impact of Data Privacy on Users' Smartphone App Adoption DecisionsProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36765258:MHCI(1-23)Online publication date: 24-Sep-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3676525
Windl MSchlegel MMayer S(2024)Exploring Users' Mental Models and Privacy Concerns During Interconnected InteractionsProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36765048:MHCI(1-23)Online publication date: 24-Sep-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3676504
Didion JWolski KWittchen DCoyle DLeimkühler TStrohmeier P(2024)Who did it? How User Agency is influenced by Visual Properties of Generated ImagesProceedings of the 37th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology10.1145/3654777.3676335(1-17)Online publication date: 13-Oct-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3654777.3676335
Windl MFeger S(2024)Designing Interactive Privacy Labels for Advanced Smart Home Device Configuration OptionsProceedings of the 2024 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference10.1145/3643834.3661527(3372-3388)Online publication date: 1-Jul-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3643834.3661527
Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

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

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Figures

Tables

Media

View Table of Conten