note

A Comparative Evaluation on Online Learning Approaches using Parallel Coordinate Visualization

Authors:

Bongshin LeeAuthors Info & Claims

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

Pages 993 - 997

https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858101

Published: 07 May 2016 Publication History

Abstract

As visualizations are increasingly used as a storytelling medium for the general public, it becomes important to help people learn how to understand visualizations. Prior studies indicate that interactive multimedia learning environments can increase the effectiveness of learning [11]. To investigate the efficacy of the multimedia learning environments for data visualization education, we compared four online learning approaches 1) baseline (i.e., no tutorial), 2) static tutorial, 3) video tutorial, and 4) interactive tutorial-through a crowdsourced user study. We measured participants' learning outcomes in using parallel coordinates with 18 tasks. Results show that participants with the interactive condition achieved higher scores than those with the static and baseline conditions, and reported that they had a more engaging experience than those with the static condition.

Supplementary Material

ZIP File (pn0429-file4.zip)

pn0429-file4.zip

Download
20.36 MB

References

[1]

Robert Amar, James Eagan, and John Stasko. 2005. Low-level components of analytic activity in information visualization. In IEEE Symposium on Information Visualization. 111--117.

Digital Library

[2]

Gennady Andrienko and Natalia Andrienko. 2001. Constructing Parallel Coordinates Plot for Problem Solving. In In Proceedings of Symposium on Smart Graphics. 9--14.

[3]

Jeremy Boy, Ronald A. Rensink, Enrico Bertini, and Jean-Daniel Fekete. 2014. A Principled Way of Assessing Visualization Literacy. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 20, 12 (2014), 1963--1972.

[4]

Jonathan Hook, Thomas Hjermitslev, Ole Sejer Iversen, and Patrick Olivier. 2013. The ReflecTable: Bridging the Gap between Theory and Practice in Design Education. In Human-Computer Interaction INTERACT 2013, Paula Kotz, Gary Marsden, Gitte Lindgaard, Janet Wesson, and Marco Winckler (Eds.). Number 8118 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 624--641.

[5]

Dandan Huang, Melanie Tory, Bon Adriel Aseniero, Lyn Bartram, Scott Bateman, Sheelagh Carpendale, Anthony Tang, and Robert Woodbury. 2015. Personal Visualization and Personal Visual Analytics. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 21, 3 (2015), 420--433.

Digital Library

[6]

David A. Kolb. 1984. Experiential learning: experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

[7]

David A. Kolb, Richard E. Boyatzis, and Charalampos Mainemelis. 2001. Experiential learning theory: Previous research and new directions. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, Mahwah, NJ, US, 227--247.

[8]

Bongshin Lee, Catherine Plaisant, Cynthia Sims Parr, Jean-Daniel Fekete, and Nathalie Henry. 2006. Task taxonomy for graph visualization. In Proceedings of the 2006 AVI workshop on BEyond time and errors: novel evaluation methods for information visualization. ACM, 1--5.

Digital Library

[9]

Sukwon Lee, Sung-Hee Kim, Ya-Hsin Hung, Heidi Lam, Youn-ah Kang, and Ji Soo YI. 2016. How do People Make Sense of Unfamiliar Visualizations?: A Grounded Model of Novice's Information Visualization Sensemaking. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 22, 1 (Jan. 2016).

Digital Library

[10]

Richard E. Mayer, Mary Hegarty, Sarah Mayer, and Julie Campbell. 2005. When Static Media Promote Active Learning: Annotated Illustrations Versus Narrated Animations in Multimedia Instruction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 11, 4 (2005), 256--265.

[11]

Roxana Moreno and Richard Mayer. 2007. Interactive Multimodal Learning Environments. Educational Psychology Review 19, 3 (June 2007), 309--326.

[12]

Tamara Munzner. 2014. Visualization Analysis and Design. CRC Press.

[13]

David Peebles, Devina Ramduny-Ellis, Geoffrey Ellis, and John V. H. Bonner. 2013. The influence of graph schemas on the interpretation of unfamiliar diagrams. In In Proceedings of the International British Computer Society Human Computer Interaction Conference: The Internet of things.

[14]

Maja Pivec. 2007. Editorial: Play and learn: potentials of game-based learning. British Journal of Educational Technology (May 2007), 387--393.

[15]

Leena Razzaq and Neil T. Heffernan. 2008. Towards Designing a User-adaptive Web-based e-Learning System. In CHI '08 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '08). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 3525--3530.

Digital Library

[16]

Holly Rushmeier, Jason Dykes, John Dill, and Peter Yoon. 2007. Revisiting the Need for Formal Education in Visualization. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications 27, 6 (2007), 12--16.

Digital Library

[17]

Roger C. Schank. 1994. Active Learning Through Multimedia. IEEE MultiMedia 1, 1 (March 1994), 69--78.

Digital Library

[18]

Priti Shah and James Hoeffner. 2002. Review of Graph Comprehension Research: Implications for Instruction. Educational Psychology Review 14, 1 (2002), 47--69.

[19]

Harri Siirtola and Kari-Jouko Rih. 2006. Interacting with parallel coordinates. Interacting with Computers 18, 6 (2006), 1278--1309.

Digital Library

[20]

Personal Visualization Workshop. 2015. Personal Visualization: Exploring Data in Everyday Life, collocated with IEEE VIS 2015. (2015). http://www.vis4me.com/personalvis15

[21]

Towards Visualization Literacy Workshop. 2014a. Visualization Literacy Workshop 2014 collocated with EuroVis 2014. (2014). http://visualizationliteracy.org/workshop

[22]

Visualization Literacy Workshop. 2014b. VisLit 2014 collocated with IEEE VIS 2014. (2014). http://visualizationliteracy.org/workshop

[23]

Anna Xamb, Eva Hornecker, Paul Marshall, Sergi Jord, Chris Dobbyn, and Robin Laney. 2013. Let's Jam the Reactable: Peer Learning During Musical Improvisation with a Tabletop Tangible Interface. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact. 20, 6 (Dec. 2013), 36:1--36:34.

Digital Library

Cited By

Ge LHedayati MCui YDing YBonilla KJoshi AOttley ABach BKwon BRapp DPeck EPadilla LCorrell MBorkin MHarrison LKay M(2024)Toward a More Comprehensive Understanding of Visualization LiteracyExtended Abstracts of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613905.3636289(1-7)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3613905.3636289
Cheng RMurat EYu LChen SHan B(2024)Understanding Online Education in Metaverse: Systems and User Experience Perspectives2024 IEEE Conference Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces (VR)10.1109/VR58804.2024.00080(598-608)Online publication date: 16-Mar-2024
https://doi.org/10.1109/VR58804.2024.00080
FIRAT E(2023)A Comparative Review of Evaluation in Visualization Literacy StudiesGörselleştirme Okuryazarlığı Çalışmalarında Değerlendirmenin Karşılaştırmalı Bir İncelemesiÇukurova Üniversitesi Mühendislik Fakültesi Dergisi10.21605/cukurovaumfd.133420538:2(391-399)Online publication date: 28-Jul-2023
https://doi.org/10.21605/cukurovaumfd.1334205
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

A Comparative Evaluation on Online Learning Approaches using Parallel Coordinate Visualization
1. Human-centered computing

Recommendations

Visualization Literacy at Elementary School
CHI '17: Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

This work advances our understanding of children's visualization literacy, and aims to improve it through a novel approach for teaching visualization at elementary school. We first contribute an analysis of data graphics and activities employed in grade ...
Design and Comparative Evaluation of Visualization Onboarding Methods
VINCI '21: Proceedings of the 14th International Symposium on Visual Information Communication and Interaction

Comprehending and exploring large and complex data is becoming increasingly important for a diverse population of users in a wide range of application domains. Visualization has proven to be well-suited in supporting this endeavor by tapping into the ...
Data is Personal: Attitudes and Perceptions of Data Visualization in Rural Pennsylvania
CHI '19: Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

Many of the guidelines that inform how designers create data visualizations originate in studies that unintentionally exclude populations that are most likely to be among the 'data poor'. In this paper, we explore which factors may drive attention and ...

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

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Note

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%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

36
Total Citations
View Citations
763
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)57
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)7

Reflects downloads up to 29 Sep 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Ge LHedayati MCui YDing YBonilla KJoshi AOttley ABach BKwon BRapp DPeck EPadilla LCorrell MBorkin MHarrison LKay M(2024)Toward a More Comprehensive Understanding of Visualization LiteracyExtended Abstracts of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613905.3636289(1-7)Online publication date: 11-May-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3613905.3636289
Cheng RMurat EYu LChen SHan B(2024)Understanding Online Education in Metaverse: Systems and User Experience Perspectives2024 IEEE Conference Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces (VR)10.1109/VR58804.2024.00080(598-608)Online publication date: 16-Mar-2024
https://doi.org/10.1109/VR58804.2024.00080
FIRAT E(2023)A Comparative Review of Evaluation in Visualization Literacy StudiesGörselleştirme Okuryazarlığı Çalışmalarında Değerlendirmenin Karşılaştırmalı Bir İncelemesiÇukurova Üniversitesi Mühendislik Fakültesi Dergisi10.21605/cukurovaumfd.133420538:2(391-399)Online publication date: 28-Jul-2023
https://doi.org/10.21605/cukurovaumfd.1334205
Stoiber CRadkohl SGrassinger FMoitzi DStitz HGoldgruber EGirardi DAigner W(2023)Authoring tool for Data Journalists integrating Self-Explanatory Visualization Onboarding Concept for a Treemap VisualizationProceedings of the 15th Biannual Conference of the Italian SIGCHI Chapter10.1145/3605390.3605394(1-14)Online publication date: 20-Sep-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3605390.3605394
Burns ALee CChawla RPeck EMahyar N(2023)Who Do We Mean When We Talk About Visualization Novices?Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3544548.3581524(1-16)Online publication date: 19-Apr-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3544548.3581524
Pandey SOttley A(2023)Mini‐VLAT: A Short and Effective Measure of Visualization LiteracyComputer Graphics Forum10.1111/cgf.1480942:3(1-11)Online publication date: 27-Jun-2023
https://doi.org/10.1111/cgf.14809
Yang LXiong CWong JWu AQu H(2023)Explaining With Examples: Lessons Learned From Crowdsourced Introductory Description of Information VisualizationsIEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics10.1109/TVCG.2021.312815729:3(1638-1650)Online publication date: 1-Mar-2023
https://doi.org/10.1109/TVCG.2021.3128157
Mahadalkar IByrd V(2023)Data Visualization Capacity (DVC) Building Tool for Teaching and Learning Data Visualization2023 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE)10.1109/FIE58773.2023.10343281(1-5)Online publication date: 18-Oct-2023
https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE58773.2023.10343281
Boucher MBach BStoiber CWang ZAigner W(2023)Educational Data Comics: What can Comics do for Education in Visualization?2023 IEEE VIS Workshop on Visualization Education, Literacy, and Activities (EduVis)10.1109/EduVis60792.2023.00012(34-40)Online publication date: 22-Oct-2023
https://doi.org/10.1109/EduVis60792.2023.00012
Stoiber CPohl MAigner W(2023)Design Actions for the Design of Visualization Onboarding Methods2023 IEEE VIS Workshop on Visualization Education, Literacy, and Activities (EduVis)10.1109/EduVis60792.2023.00007(1-10)Online publication date: 22-Oct-2023
https://doi.org/10.1109/EduVis60792.2023.00007
Show More Cited By

View Options

Get Access

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.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents