Presentation Capita Selecta CHI - final

1. Where to go with your subject?! Anne Everars, Greet Robijns en Ward Cools woensdag 22 mei 13

2. Content Introduction Design choices Paper prototype Digital prototype Expert evaluation Evaluation digital prototype What we learned Teamwork Technical issues Future work woensdag 22 mei 13

3. Content Introduction What? Why? How? Design choices Paper prototype Digital prototype Expert evaluation Evaluation digital prototype What we learned Teamwork Technical issues Future work woensdag 22 mei 13

4. What to visualize? Difference between LAK and EDM data Localization of the subjects Differences between participating universities (number of written papers) woensdag 22 mei 13

5. Why this? Interesting to know where people are writing about a certain subject LAK and EDM have a comparable research domain ➠ visualize the differences Quantity is also visualized, to see where a lot of research is done about a subject woensdag 22 mei 13

6. How did we do this? Beginning Simple map with marker for the associations map with EDM versus LAK data woensdag 22 mei 13

7. How did we do this? Rapid prototyping Paper prototype First digital version Expert evaluation Second digital version Evaluation digital version woensdag 22 mei 13

9. Design choices Conﬂict: Visualize the quantity of papers e.g. in the US more publications than in Guatemala Visualize distribution between LAK and EDM woensdag 22 mei 13

10. Design choices Continue working with bar charts Markers are too close together Bar can get really long Not clear to which association it belongs woensdag 22 mei 13

11. Design choices Pie chart Located at the center of the association Unreadable when zoomed out or many associations close together Hard to compare associations (number of papers not clear) woensdag 22 mei 13

12. Design choicesPop-ups Clear to which association it belongs Map not ﬂooded with - potentially unwanted - information Small markers on the map itself Hover over association to see the name Colored countries woensdag 22 mei 13

13. Design choices woensdag 22 mei 13

14. Pop-ups? Visualize information about one association Visualize differences between two associations 2 options were evaluated by use of paper prototype woensdag 22 mei 13

16. Paper prototype woensdag 22 mei 13

25. Paper prototype the compare issue woensdag 22 mei 13

26. Evaluation Some remarks during user test ‘Compare’ and ‘Search’ button are placed too close together. Dots in the map might be mistaken for capital cities Axis should be calibrated on the pop-ups Can you only push the ‘Compare’ button if (more than) one association is selected? Compare more than two associations? woensdag 22 mei 13

27. Evaluation SUS-questionnaire ➠ express the quality with a number ➠ get a view of the usability of the application SUS-score = 74 woensdag 22 mei 13

29. Changes Scale : no continuous colors, but discrete ➠ beter visualize the differences Location of search and compare button are (hopefully) better woensdag 22 mei 13

30. Digital prototype woensdag 22 mei 13

39. Remarks from class 0 papers graph not clear Color scale not clear ➠ continuous scale is better than 5 colors woensdag 22 mei 13

41. Expert evaluation Transparency adds too much complexity to the overview map ➠ chose what to visualize (switched view?) Small markers visible at a higher level? Keep an overview of the entire map while zoomed in Graph in compare view is confusing Evaluation over time? woensdag 22 mei 13

42. Changes Added radiobuttons Two levels : - quantity - conference No more transparency Overview map woensdag 22 mei 13

44. Evaluation - remarks Radio buttons difﬁcult to see Hard to click the ‘compare city’ button ➠ caused by the computer Graphs : unclear x-axis Interesting to look at multiple cities, since there is mostly only one paper about a subject woensdag 22 mei 13

45. Evaluation SUS-score = 65.6 woensdag 22 mei 13

47. What we learned Some associations have a strong preference for one of the conferences ‘learning’ gives a divided image Learning analytics and machine learning both concern learning Visualize both conferences Social network analysis mainly LAK only popular in certain countries woensdag 22 mei 13

48. What we learned Some associations have a strong preference for one of the conferences ‘learning’ gives a divided image Learning analytics and machine learning both concern learning Visualize both conferences Social network analysis mainly LAK only popular in certain countries woensdag 22 mei 13

49. What we learned Important to get an idea about the data Important to get an idea about what what people want to know about the data woensdag 22 mei 13

51. Teamwork? First meeting to look at what we wanted and how we wanted to do visualize it Divided the tasks Everyone did their part Greet did evaluation, Anne and Ward worked on the changes woensdag 22 mei 13

53. Technical issues? Clash between markers and pop-ups Location of universities Naming of university e.g. Katholieke Universiteit Leuven vs. K.U.Leuven Coloring countries woensdag 22 mei 13

55. Future work White-space in compare boxes More information about a paper or university Evaluation over time Search option when selected “# papers” woensdag 22 mei 13

56. DEMO woensdag 22 mei 13

57. woensdag 22 mei 13

58. ?Questions? woensdag 22 mei 13

Presentation Capita Selecta CHI - final

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Ähnlich wie Presentation Capita Selecta CHI - final

Ähnlich wie Presentation Capita Selecta CHI - final (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Presentation Capita Selecta CHI - final