Evaluating Information Visualizations with Working Memory Metrics

Bandlow, Alisa; Matzen, Laura E.; Cole, Kerstan Suzanne; Dornburg, Alex; Geiseler, Charles J.; Greenfield, John Andrew; McNamara, Laura A.; Marie, Stevens-Adams, Susan

doi:10.1007/978-3-642-22098-2_53

Cited by 4 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some examples of secondary tasks in a dual-task paradigm include span tasks that require participants to remember or follow patterns of information, while completing the primary task, then report the remembered or relevant information from the pattern (for a full description of theoretical bases for a dual-task paradigm see Pashler, 1994 ). To our knowledge, only one study has used a dual-task paradigm to evaluate cognitive load of a visualization decision-making task (Bandlow et al, 2011 ). However, a growing body of research on other domains, such as wayfinding and spatial cognition, demonstrates the utility of using dual-task paradigms to understand the types of working memory that users employ for a task (Caffò, Picucci, Di Masi, & Bosco, 2011 ; Meilinger, Knauff, & Bülthoff, 2008 ; Ratliff & Newcombe, 2005 ; Trueswell & Papafragou, 2010 ).…”

Section: Empirical Studies Of Visualization Decision Makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Decision making with visualizations: a cognitive framework across disciplines

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Visualizations—visual representations of information, depicted in graphics—are studied by researchers in numerous ways, ranging from the study of the basic principles of creating visualizations, to the cognitive processes underlying their use, as well as how visualizations communicate complex information (such as in medical risk or spatial patterns). However, findings from different domains are rarely shared across domains though there may be domain-general principles underlying visualizations and their use. The limited cross-domain communication may be due to a lack of a unifying cognitive framework. This review aims to address this gap by proposing an integrative model that is grounded in models of visualization comprehension and a dual-process account of decision making. We review empirical studies of decision making with static two-dimensional visualizations motivated by a wide range of research goals and find significant direct and indirect support for a dual-process account of decision making with visualizations. Consistent with a dual-process model, the first type of visualization decision mechanism produces fast, easy, and computationally light decisions with visualizations. The second facilitates slower, more contemplative, and effortful decisions with visualizations. We illustrate the utility of a dual-process account of decision making with visualizations using four cross-domain findings that may constitute universal visualization principles. Further, we offer guidance for future research, including novel areas of exploration and practical recommendations for visualization designers based on cognitive theory and empirical findings.

show abstract

Section: Empirical Studies Of Visualization Decision Makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Decision making with visualizations: a cognitive framework across disciplines

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Tasks that require more working memory will demonstrate significantly larger dual-task costs. Dual-task paradigms have been used to demonstrate performance decrements in many applied settings, including visual and cognitive distractions while driving [16], interacting with technology [14], visually searching for remembered objects [26], and performing visualization tasks [8,88].…”

Section: Dual-task Paradigmsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Visualization studies commonly assert that some visualization techniques can reduce cognitive effort (e.g., [31,88,8]). Researchers commonly use cognitive load theory to describe the influence of visualizations on working memory, which proposes that increases in working memory are due to extraneous cognitive load (i.e., load associated with the information communication method [60]).…”

Section: Introduction Of Predator Species In Ecosystemmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Dual-task designs Dual-task cost associated with speed and accuracy [8,88] Empirically validated measure of cognitive effort. Possibility of high ecological validity in contexts where users are distracted.…”

Section: Introduction Of Predator Species In Ecosystemmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Possible confounds (speed and accuracy trade-offs and motivation). Some inconclusive dual-task cost effects in prior work [8,88]. External validity will vary with experimental conditions.…”

Section: Introduction Of Predator Species In Ecosystemmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Toward Objective Evaluation of Working Memory in Visualizations: A Case Study Using Pupillometry and a Dual-Task Paradigm

Padilla

Castro

Quinan

et al. 2020

IEEE Trans. Visual. Comput. Graphics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cognitive science has established widely used and validated procedures for evaluating working memory in numerous applied domains, but surprisingly few studies have employed these methodologies to assess claims about the impacts of visualizations on working memory. The lack of information visualization research that uses validated procedures for measuring working memory may be due, in part, to the absence of cross-domain methodological guidance tailored explicitly to the unique needs of visualization research. This paper presents a set of clear, practical, and empirically validated methods for evaluating working memory during visualization tasks and provides readers with guidance in selecting an appropriate working memory evaluation paradigm. As a case study, we illustrate multiple methods for evaluating working memory in a visual-spatial aggregation task with geospatial data. The results show that the use of dual-task experimental designs (simultaneous performance of several tasks compared to single-task performance) and pupil dilation can reveal working memory demands associated with task difficulty and dual-tasking. In a dual-task experimental design, measures of task completion times and pupillometry revealed the working memory demands associated with both task difficulty and dual-tasking. Pupillometry demonstrated that participants' pupils were significantly larger when they were completing a more difficult task and when multitasking. We propose that researchers interested in the relative differences in working memory between visualizations should consider a converging methods approach, where physiological measures and behavioral measures of working memory are employed to generate a rich evaluation of visualization effort.

show abstract

Incidental graphical perception: How marks and display time influence accuracy

Moreira,

Mendes,

Gonçalves

2023

Information Visualization

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Incidental visualizations are meant to be perceived at-a-glance, on-the-go, and during short exposure times, but are not seen on demand. Instead, they appear in people’s fields of view during an ongoing primary task. They differ from glanceable visualizations because the information is not received on demand, and they differ from ambient visualizations because the information is not continuously embedded in the environment. However, current graphical perception guidelines do not consider situations where information is presented at specific moments during brief exposure times without being the user’s primary focus. Therefore, we conducted a crowdsourced user study with 99 participants to understand how accurate people’s incidental graphical perception is. Each participant was tested on one of the three conditions: position of dots, length of lines, and angle of lines. We varied the number of elements for each combination and the display time. During the study, participants were asked to perform reproduction tasks, where they had to recreate a previously shown stimulus in each. Our results indicate that incidental graphical perception can be accurate when using position, length, and angles. Furthermore, we argue that incidental visualizations should be designed for low exposure times (between 300 and 1000 ms).

show abstract

Evaluating Information Visualizations with Working Memory Metrics

Cited by 4 publications

References 7 publications

Decision making with visualizations: a cognitive framework across disciplines

Decision making with visualizations: a cognitive framework across disciplines

Toward Objective Evaluation of Working Memory in Visualizations: A Case Study Using Pupillometry and a Dual-Task Paradigm

Incidental graphical perception: How marks and display time influence accuracy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About