Geosystems Research Insitute, High Performance Computing Collaboratory, Mississippi State University, MS, USA.
IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph. 2009 Nov-Dec;15(6):1209-18. doi: 10.1109/TVCG.2009.114.
Many techniques have been proposed to show uncertainty in data visualizations. However, very little is known about their effectiveness in conveying meaningful information. In this paper, we present a user study that evaluates the perception of uncertainty amongst four of the most commonly used techniques for visualizing uncertainty in one-dimensional and two-dimensional data. The techniques evaluated are traditional errorbars, scaled size of glyphs, color-mapping on glyphs, and color-mapping of uncertainty on the data surface. The study uses generated data that was designed to represent the systematic and random uncertainty components. Twenty-seven users performed two types of search tasks and two types of counting tasks on 1D and 2D datasets. The search tasks involved finding data points that were least or most uncertain. The counting tasks involved counting data features or uncertainty features. A 4x4 full-factorial ANOVA indicated a significant interaction between the techniques used and the type of tasks assigned for both datasets indicating that differences in performance between the four techniques depended on the type of task performed. Several one-way ANOVAs were computed to explore the simple main effects. Bonferronni's correction was used to control for the family-wise error rate for alpha-inflation. Although we did not find a consistent order among the four techniques for all the tasks, there are several findings from the study that we think are useful for uncertainty visualization design. We found a significant difference in user performance between searching for locations of high and searching for locations of low uncertainty. Errorbars consistently underperformed throughout the experiment. Scaling the size of glyphs and color-mapping of the surface performed reasonably well. The efficiency of most of these techniques were highly dependent on the tasks performed. We believe that these findings can be used in future uncertainty visualization design. In addition, the framework developed in this user study presents a structured approach to evaluate uncertainty visualization techniques, as well as provides a basis for future research in uncertainty visualization.
许多技术已被提出用于在数据可视化中展示不确定性。然而,对于这些技术在传达有意义信息方面的有效性,我们知之甚少。在本文中,我们进行了一项用户研究,评估了在一维和二维数据中可视化不确定性时最常用的四种技术中的不确定性感知。评估的技术包括传统的误差棒、字形大小的缩放、字形的颜色映射以及数据表面上的不确定性颜色映射。该研究使用生成的数据来代表系统和随机不确定性分量。二十七位用户在一维和二维数据集上执行了两种搜索任务和两种计数任务。搜索任务涉及找到不确定性最小或最大的数据点。计数任务涉及计数数据特征或不确定性特征。4x4 完全析因方差分析表明,在两个数据集上,使用的技术和分配的任务类型之间存在显著的交互作用,这表明四种技术之间的性能差异取决于执行的任务类型。进行了多次单向方差分析以探索简单的主要效应。使用 Bonferroni 校正来控制因 alpha 膨胀而导致的总体错误率。虽然我们没有在所有任务中找到四种技术的一致顺序,但从研究中我们发现了一些我们认为对不确定性可视化设计有用的发现。我们发现,在搜索高不确定性和搜索低不确定性位置的用户性能之间存在显著差异。误差棒在整个实验中表现始终不佳。字形大小的缩放和表面的颜色映射表现相当不错。这些技术的效率在很大程度上取决于执行的任务。我们相信这些发现可以用于未来的不确定性可视化设计。此外,本用户研究中开发的框架提供了一种评估不确定性可视化技术的结构化方法,并为未来的不确定性可视化研究提供了基础。
IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph. 2009
IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph. 2005
IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph. 2009
IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph. 2008
IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph. 2008
Artif Intell Med. 2006-7
IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph. 2008
Oncologist. 1997
IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph. 2006
IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph. 2007
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2024-11-1
Front Bioinform. 2022-2-17
IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph. 2020-1
Cogn Res Princ Implic. 2017
Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci. 2015-11-28
IFIP Adv Inf Commun Technol. 2012
Proc SIGCHI Conf Hum Factor Comput Syst. 2014
IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph. 2013-12