Exploring how and why people use visualizations in casual contexts: Modeling user goals and regulated motivations

Information Visualization

Volumn 11, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 106-123

  Sprague, David ^a   Tory, Melanie ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VICTORIA   (Canada)

Author keywords

casual InfoVis; cultural probe; grounded evaluation; InfoVis for the masses; motivation; PIMM

Indexed keywords

CASUAL INFOVIS; CULTURAL PROBES; GROUNDED EVALUATION; INFOVIS FOR THE MASSES; PIMM;

MOTIVATION;

VISUALIZATION;

EID: 84871792095     PISSN: 14738716     EISSN: 14738724     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1473871611433710     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Pousman Z, Stasko J, Mateas M. Casual information visualization: depictions of data in everyday life. IEEE Trans Visual Comput Graphics. 2007 ; 13 (6). 1145-1152
2. Byron L, Wattenberg M. Stacked graphs: geometry & aesthetics. IEEE Trans Visual Comput Graphics. 2008 ; 14 (6). 1245-1252
3. ShuttleworthMMcCormickMOliverC. World Cup2010Twitter Replay, http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/world-cup-match-replay (2010, accessed 9 August 2010).
4. Stamen Design. Digg labs, http://stamen.com/clients/digg (2010, accessed 31 Dec. 2011).
5. Hearst MA, Rosner D. Tag clouds: data analysis tool or social signaller?. HICSS '08: Proceedings of the 41st annual Hawaii international conference on system sciences ; Waikoloa HI, 7 Jan. 2008, pp.1 10. Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society.
6. FewS. What ordinary people need most from information visualization today. Perceptual Edge Visual Business Intelligence Newsletter, http://www.perceptualedge.com/articles/visual-business-intelligence/ what-people-need-from-infovis.pdf (2008, accessed 31 Dec. 2011).
7. DanzigerM. Information visualization for the people. MSc Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, 2008.
8. Gaver B, Dunne T, Pacenti E. Design: cultural probes. Interactions. 1999 ; 6 (1). 21-29
9. Isenberg P, Zuk T, Collins C, et al. Grounded evaluation of information visualizations. BELIV '08: Proceedings of the 2008 conference on beyond time and errors: novel evaluation methods for information visualization ; Florence, Italy, 5 April 2008, pp.1 8. New York: ACM.
10. Munzner T. A nested model for visualization design and validation. IEEE Trans Visual Comput Graphics. 2009 ; 15 (6). 921-928
11. Viégas FB, Golder S, Donath J. Visualizing email content: portraying relationships from conversational histories. CHI '06: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems ; Montréal, Québec ;2006, pp.979 988. New York: ACM.
12. Hassenzahl M, Ullrich D. To do or not to do: differences in user experience and retrospective judgments depending on the presence or absence of instrumental goals. Interact Comput. 2007 ; 19 (4). 429-437
13. Viégas FB, Wattenberg M, McKeon M, et al. Harry Potter and the meat-filled freezer: a case study of spontaneous usage of visualization tools. HICSS '08: Proceedings of the 41st annual Hawaii international conference on system sciences ; Waikoloa HI, 7 Jan. 2008, pp.159-168. Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society.
14. Wattenberg M. Baby names, visualization, and social data analysis. IEEE symposium on information visualization ; Minneapolis MN, 23 Oct. 2005, pp.1-7. Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society.
15. Viégas FB, Wattenberg M, van Ham F, et al. ManyEyes: a site for visualization at internet scale. IEEE Trans Visual Comput Graphics. 2007 ; 13 (6). 1121-1128
16. Danis CM, Viégas FB, Wattenberg M, et al. Your place or mine? Visualization as a community component. CHI '08: Proceeding of the twenty-sixth annual SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems ; Florence, Italy, 2008, pp.275-284. New York: ACM.
17. Neumann P, Tat A, Zuk T, et al. KeyStrokes: personalizing typed text with visualization. IEEE VGTC symposium on visualization (EuroVis) ; Norrkoping, Sweden, 23-25 May 2007, pp.43-50.
18. GhaharyA. Towards an ideal in informative art. MSc Thesis, Simon Fraser University, Surrey, BC, 2009.
19. Bateman S, Mandryk RL, Gutwin C, et al. Useful junk? The effects of visual embellishment on comprehension and memorability of charts. CHI '10: Proceedings of the 28th international conference on human factors in computing systems ; Atlanta, GA, 2010, pp.2573-2582. New York: ACM.
20. Pousman Z, Rouzati H, Stasko J. Imprint, a community visualization of printer data: designing for open-ended engagement on sustainability. CSCW '08: Proceedings of the 2008 ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work ; San Diego, CA, 2008, pp.13-16. New York: ACM.
21. Grammel L, Tory M, Storey M. How non-experts construct and interpret visualizations. IEEE Trans Visual Comput Graphics. 2010 ; 16: 943-952
22. Heer J, Ham F, Carpendale S, et al Creation and collaboration: engaging new audiences for Information Visualization, Information visualization: Human-centered issues and perspectives. Kerren A Stasko JT Fekete J North C, ed. Berlin and Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag ; 2008: 92-133.
23. Kang H, Plaisant C, Shneiderman B. New approaches to help users get started with visual interfaces: multi-layered interfaces and integrated initial guidance. dg.o '03: Proceedings of the 2003 annual national conference on digital government research ; Boston, MA, 19 May 2003, pp.1 6. Los Angeles: Digital Government Society of North America.
24. Heer J, Viégas FB, Wattenberg M. Voyagers and voyeurs: supporting asynchronous collaborative information visualization. CHI '07: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems ; San Jose, CA, 28 April 2007, pp.1029-1038. New York: ACM.
25. Luther K, Counts S, Stecher KB, et al. Pathfinder: an online collaboration environment for citizen scientists. CHI '09: Proceedings of the 27th international conference on human factors in computing systems ; Boston, MA, 4 April 2009, pp.239-248. New York: ACM.
26. Graham C, Rouncefield M, Gibbs M, et al. How probes work. OZCHI '07: Proceedings of the 19th Australasian conference on computer-human interaction ; Adelaide, Australia, 28 Nov. 2007, pp.29 37. New York: ACM.
27. EngelhardtY. The language of graphics: a framework for the analysis of syntax and meaning. PhD Thesis, Institute for Logic, Language and Computation at the University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2002.
28. Creswell JW Research design: qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE ; 1994 :
29. Locke EA, Latham GP. Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation. Am Psychol. 2002 ; 57 (9). 705-717
30. WolframS. Wolfram Alpha Computational Knowledge Engine, http://www.wolframalpha.com (2010, accessed 9 August 2010).
31. Davis FD, Bagozzi RP, Warshaw PR. User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Manage Sci. 1989 ; 35 (8). 982-1003
32. Pet Handlers Inc. Graph jam: life and pop culture graphed for your inner geek, http://www.graphjam.com (2010, accessed 8 July 2010).
33. Segel E, Heer J. Narrative visualization: telling stories with data. IEEE Trans Visual Comput Graphics. 2010 ; 16 (6). 1139-1148
34. Holmquist LE, Skog T. Informative art: information visualization in everyday environments. GRAPHITE '03: Proceedings of the 1st international conference on computer graphics and interactive techniques in Australasia and South East Asia ; Melbourne, Australia, 11 Feb. 2003, pp.229-235. New York: ACM.
35. Hinrichs U, Schmidt H, Carpendale S. EMDialog: bringing information visualization into the museum. IEEE Trans Visual Comput Graphics. 2008 ; 14 (6). 1181-1188
36. Gardner G. Is there a valid test of Herzberg's two-factor theory?. J Occup Psychol. 1977 ; 50 (3). 197-204
37. Roberts JA, Hann I, Slaughter SA. Understanding the motivations, participation, and performance of open source software developers: a longitudinal study of the Apache projects. Manage Sci. 2006 ; 52 (7). 984-999
38. DwivediYKWilliamsMDLalB. Profiling adoption, acceptance and diffusion research in the information systems discipline. In: 16th European conference on information systems, Galway, Ireland, 2008, pp.204-215. Available at http://is2.lse.ac.uk/asp/aspecis/20080102.pdf
39. Benbasat I, Barki H. Quo vadis, TAM?. J Assoc Inf Sys. 2007 ; 8 (4). 211-218
40. Goodhue DL, Thompson RL. Task-technology fit and individual performance. MIS Q. 1995 ; 19 (2). 213-236