Human-Centered Approaches in Geovisualization Design: Investigating Multiple Methods Through a Long-Term Case Study

Abstract

context of use later prototypes requirements early prototypes Fig. 1. Graphical approaches used in a long-term investigation into using human-centred methods in geovisualization design include, from left: keyword in context; card sorting; requirements and design concept sketching; and wireframe, paper and digital prototypes.Abstract-Working with three domain specialists we investigate human-centered approaches to geovisualization following an ISO13407 taxonomy covering context of use, requirements and early stages of design. Our case study, undertaken over three years, draws attention to repeating trends: that generic approaches fail to elicit adequate requirements for geovis application design; that the use of real data is key to understanding needs and possibilities; that trust and knowledge must be built and developed with collaborators. These processes take time but modified human-centred approaches can be effective. A scenario developed through contextual inquiry but supplemented with domain data and graphics is useful to geovis designers. Wireframe, paper and digital prototypes enable successful communication between specialist and geovis domains when incorporating real and interesting data, prompting exploratory behaviour and eliciting previously unconsidered requirements. Paper prototypes are particularly successful at eliciting suggestions, especially for novel visualization. Enabling specialists to explore their data freely with a digital prototype is as effective as using a structured task protocol and is easier to administer. Autoethnography has potential for framing the design process. We conclude that a common understanding of context of use, domain data and visualization possibilities are essential to successful geovis design and develop as this progresses. HC approaches can make a significant contribution here. However, modified approaches, applied with flexibility, are most promising. We advise early, collaborative engagement with data -through simple, transient visual artefacts supported by data sketches and existing designs -before moving to successively more sophisticated data wireframes and data prototypes.

User studies in cartography: opportunities for empirical research on interactive maps and visualizations

“…Other potentially fruitful research opportunities for improving the UCD process include integrating user evaluations with prototyping (Lloyd & Dykes, 2011), distributed usability studies (Mendonça & Delazari, 2012), and crowdsourced user analytics (Veregin & Wortley, 2014). Such research into the UCD process is needed not just to improve interactive, online, and mobile maps, but also to build a corpus of educational guidance to prepare students to fill user experience (UX) designer positions (Garrett, 2010); this newly trained wave of interaction designers working in cartography is far more likely to conduct UCD studies than controlled experiments.…”

“…These problems persist despite the now numerous recommendations in cartography to follow a 'user-centered' approach to the development and evaluation of interactive maps and visualizations (e.g. Cartwright et al, 2001;Fuhrmann & Pike, 2005;Kveladze, Kraak, & Elzakker, 2013;Lloyd & Dykes, 2011;MacEachren & Kraak, 2001;Robinson, Chen, Lengerich, Meyer, & MacEachren, 2005;Roth, Ross, & MacEachren, 2015).…”

Design Study Methodology: Reflections from the Trenches and the Stacks

“…Some of the most relevant for design studies include the investigation of Lloyd and Dykes into the early steps of problem analysis and paper prototyping in a longitudinal geovisualization design study, providing interesting insights into which human-centered methods work and which do not [42]; van Wijk's model for understanding and reasoning about the "value of visualization" [88] that provides a lens on the interplay between data, user, and visualization; Amar and Stasko's guidance for problem-driven visualization research by identifying and articulating gaps between the representation and the analysis of data, and provide precepts for bridging these gaps [3]; and Pretorius and van Wijk's arguments for the importance of considering not just the needs of the user, but also the structure and semantics of the data when designing a visualization tool [61].…”

“…The relevant literature instead focuses on methods for designing [1,42,66,79,82,90,91] and evaluating [13,33,39,50,68,69,76,80,85,86,95] visualization tools. We distinguish between methods and methodology with the analogy of cooking; methods are like ingredients, whereas methodology is like a recipe.…”

Designing an exploratory visual interface to the results of citizen surveys

“…For example, some surprise was expressed at the dominance of Loughborough (Charnwood district) made evident from the cartogram. This should not be too much of a shock as members of the LCC team expressed representational needs that gave rise to the algorithm through which these layouts are produced (Wood and Dykes 2008) during a previous collaboration (Lloyd and Dykes 2011) and have used them in documents involved in local policy development (Leicestershire County Council 2010).…”