Comparing different levels of interaction constraints for deriving visual problem isomorphs

VAST 10 - IEEE Conference on Visual Analytics Science and Technology 2010, Proceedings

Volumn , Issue , 2010, Pages 195-202

  Dou, Wenwen ^a   Ziemkiewicz, Caroline ^a   Harrison, Lane ^a   Jeong, Dong Hyun ^a   Ryan, Roxanne ^a   Ribarsky, William ^a   Wang, Xiaoyu ^a   Chang, Remco ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHARLOTTE   (United States)

^b TUFTS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Interaction; Problem solving; Visual isomorph

Indexed keywords

ANALYTICAL PROBLEMS; COGNITIVE SCIENCE; INTERACTION; USER STUDY; VISUAL ANALYTICS; VISUAL ISOMORPH; VISUAL REPRESENTATIONS;

GRAPHICAL USER INTERFACES; OPTIMIZATION; VISUALIZATION;

PROBLEM SOLVING;

EID: 78650945304     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1109/VAST.2010.5653599     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (21)

1. J. M. Carroll, J. C. Thomas, and A. Malhotra. Presentation and representation in design problem-solving. British Journal of Psychology, 71(1):143-154, 1980.
2. W. S. Cleveland and R. McGill. Graphical perception: Theory, experimentation, and application to the development of graphical methods. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 79(387):531-554, 1984.
3. P. Hanrahan. Systems of thought. Eurovis 2009 Keynote Address, 2009.
4. J. R. Hayes and H. A. Simon. Psychological differences among problem isomorphs. In J. Castellan, D. B. Pisoni, and G. Potts, editors, Cognitive Theory, volume 2. Erlbaum, 1977.
5. C. Hundhausen, S. Douglas, and J. Stasko. A meta-study of algorithm visualization effectiveness. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing, 13(3):259-290, 2002.
6. E. Hutchins. Material anchors for conceptual blends. Journal of Pragmatics, 37(10):1555-1577, October 2005.
7. D. Kirsh. The intelligent use of space. Artificial Intelligence, 73(1-2):31-68, 1995.
8. D. Kirsh. Interaction, external representations and sense making. In N. A. T. . H. van Rijn, editor, Proceedings of the 31st Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, pages 1103-1108, Austin, TX, 2009. Cognitive Science Society.
9. D. Kirsh. Problem solving and situated cognition. In The Cambridge Handbook of Situated Cognition, pages 264-306, Cambridge, 2009. Cambridge University Press.
10. D. Kirsh. Projection, problem space and anchoring. In N. A. T. . H. van Rijn, editor, Proceedings of the 31st Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, pages 2310-2315, Austin, TX, 2009. Cognitive Science Society.
11. D. Kirsh and P. Maglio. On distinguishing epistemic from pragmatic actions. Cognitive Science, 18(4):513-549, 1994.
12. K. Kotovsky and N. Kushmerick. Processing constraints and problem difficulty: A model. In K. J. Hammond and D. Gentner, editors, Proc. Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 1991.
13. J. H. Larkin and H. A. Simon. Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words. Cognitive Science, 11:65-99, 1987.
14. Z. Liu, N. J. Nersessian, and J. T. Stasko. Distributed cognition as a theoretical framework for information visualization. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 14(6):1173-1180, 2008.
15. S. E. Palmer. Fundamental aspects of cognitive representation. In E. Rosch and B. B. Lloyd, editors, Cognition and Categorization, pages 262-304. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1978.
16. W. A. Pike, J. Stasko, R. Chang, and T. A. O'Connell. The science of interaction. Information Visualization, 8, 2009.
17. H. A. Simon. The Sciences of the Artificial. The MIT Press, 1996.
18. K. Stenning and J. Oberlander. A cognitive theory of graphical and linguistic reasoning: Logic and implementation. Cognitive Science, 19(1):97-140, 1995.
19. J. J. Thomas and K. A. Cook. Illuminating the Path: The Research and Development Agenda for Visual Analytics. National Visualization and Analytics Ctr, 2005.
20. L. Tweedie. Characterizing interactive externalizations. In Proceedings CHI, pages 375-382. ACM Press, 1997.
21. J. S. Yi, Y. a. Kang, J. Stasko, and J. Jacko. Toward a deeper understanding of the role of interaction in information visualization. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 13(6):1224-1231, 2007.