Reconfiguration Strategies with Composite Data Physicalizations

Abstract

Figure 1: A digital render of one of the exemplar physicalizations (phys1, right), colors depict identified clusters by the participant. Various reconfiguration strategies were observed, including the increase of cohesion within clusters (left) and the increase of separation between clusters (middle).

Physecology: A Conceptual Framework to Describe Data Physicalizations in their Real-World Context

“…This term put emphasis on the artistic and social nature of physical depictions of data. Later in 2015 Jansen et al [47] defined data and variety in people's strategies when organizing physical information [88]. Lastly, design [24,61,96] and field studies [39,84,85] show the myriad of different ways in which system infrastructures are designed and how they are used and appropriated in context.…”

“…Dragicevic et al [22] introduced a classification of different actuation technologies that are relevant for dynamic data physicalizations: positioning in space, control over shape and geometry, control over material properties, and specialized applications. However, the classes of 'positioning in space' and 'control over shape and geometry' are not mutually LOOP [83] Cairn [33] EMERGE [95] Econundrum [82] Relief [61] Vibration FizViz [88] PolySurface [23] eCLOUD [32] Living Map [20] Physikit [38] Activity Sculptures [93] Pneumatic Charts [20] Wage Islands [42] Mill Road [56] Table 3. An overview of the different types of information communication, each with an exemplar system.…”

“…The effects of a lack of consideration of the wider context around physicalizations is also increasingly demonstrated in empirical research. Recent studies [46,87,88] demonstrate that selected physicalization designs simply do not meet their assumptions around how they visualize data to users, or how they provide singular interaction patterns. For example, studies demonstrate the different perceptions of size across physical shapes [46], the different perceptions of physical information in general across perspectives [87], and people's different interaction strategies when organizing physical information [88].…”

“…Recent studies [46,87,88] demonstrate that selected physicalization designs simply do not meet their assumptions around how they visualize data to users, or how they provide singular interaction patterns. For example, studies demonstrate the different perceptions of size across physical shapes [46], the different perceptions of physical information in general across perspectives [87], and people's different interaction strategies when organizing physical information [88]. These empirical studies suggest that current strategies for physicalization are often inconsistent for elements of context such as size, orientation, or interaction.…”

“…possible, such as using gestures [96], the manual re-arrangement of data objects [42,46], or the pushing/pulling of physical bar charts [97]. The limited conceptualization of the context of use in physicalizations is also increasingly reflected in empirical research, as exemplar physicalization designs have shown to be ambiguous in how they were perceived [46,87], and therefore interacted with [88]. Furthermore, design explorations [24,61,96] and field studies [39,84,85] outline the challenges of using physicalizations as mediators for complex tasks, and the importance of making them intuitive and context-sensitive interfaces for interaction with data.…”