1 / 63

Info Vis, Multitasking and Large Displays

Info Vis, Multitasking and Large Displays. Mary Czerwinski Microsoft Research. Information Visualization. Main Theme—Offload cognitive work to the perceptual system Focus on animated transitions to maintain context Work with George Robertson, Kim Cameron, Daniel Robinson. Polyarchies.

shurt
Download Presentation

Info Vis, Multitasking and Large Displays

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Info Vis, Multitasking and Large Displays Mary Czerwinski Microsoft Research

  2. MPC-Microsoft Research

  3. Information Visualization Main Theme—Offload cognitive work to the perceptual system Focus on animated transitions to maintain context Work with George Robertson, Kim Cameron, Daniel Robinson MPC-Microsoft Research

  4. Polyarchies • Visualizing multiple dimensions sequentially/simultaneously • Using animation to orient user spatially • Questions of timing, freeze frames, linkages, cognitive load • Multiple foci pivots • Iterative design with internal db stakeholders and developers MPC-Microsoft Research

  5. What is the problem? • Hierarchies are very common • 20 years of hierarchy visualization R&D • Significant problems remain • New problems appearing (multiple hierarchies) MPC-Microsoft Research

  6. Current Approaches • Many 2D and 3D Hierarchy Visualizations • Each works for some tasks and some scales • Very few have had user testing • Windows Tree Control • Many observed problems MPC-Microsoft Research

  7. What’s wrong with this picture? MPC-Microsoft Research

  8. Problems: Cognitive Overhead • Loss of context • Or loss of detail • Separate detail/overview  extra attentional resource required • Multiple foci is difficult • Which item is open? MPC-Microsoft Research

  9. Basic View Strategies • Two view (separate detail/overview views) • Distorted view • Distorted data: fisheye • Distorted space: 3D, hyperbolic • Focus in Context (integrated view) • Many use ANIMATION during transitions…most not empirically evaluated MPC-Microsoft Research

  10. Cone Tree – Scales, Integrates Focus + Context • Robertson, Mackinlay & Card, Xerox PARC, CHI’91 • Limits: • 10 levels • 1000 nodes • Up to 10,000 • Animated, complex rotations MPC-Microsoft Research

  11. TreeMap – Scales, Integrates Focus + Context • Johnson & Shneiderman, U. Maryland, Vis’91 • Space filling • ~3000 objects • MicroLogic’s DiskMapper MPC-Microsoft Research

  12. Hyperbolic Browser - 1994 • Lamping & Rao, Xerox PARC, UIST’94 • Projected onto circle, animated • 1000’s of nodes • Reaction to occlusion problem in Cone Trees MPC-Microsoft Research

  13. Sunburst - 2000 • Stasko & Zhang, Georgia Tech, InfoVis 2000 • Radial space-filling • Techniques for viewing more detail, animated MPC-Microsoft Research

  14. Multiple Hierarchies (3 kinds) One hierarchy changing over time • Time Tube (Chi et al., 1998) • Taxonomy visualization (Graham et al., 2000) MultiTrees (shared subtrees) • XML3D (Munzner, 1997) Polyarchy MPC-Microsoft Research

  15. People and Resources Example • Multiple Hierarchies Exist • Direct reporting • Cost or Profit Center • Location • Implicit relationships • But only one hierarchy shown at a time MPC-Microsoft Research

  16. Polyarchy: 1 Selection, 1 Hierarchy MPC-Microsoft Research

  17. Figure . Polyarchy Visualization showing relationship of three people in the management hierarchy. MPC-Microsoft Research

  18. Two Styles of Visual Pivot • Rotating • Sliding MPC-Microsoft Research

  19. A B C D E F G H Visual Pivot (Rotation around Vertical Axis) MPC-Microsoft Research

  20. Hierarchy 2 Hierarchy 1 Axis of rotation Schematic of Visual Pivot (rotation) MPC-Microsoft Research

  21. Rotation around Horizontal Axis MPC-Microsoft Research

  22. Sliding Animation MPC-Microsoft Research

  23. Stacked (w/links) MPC-Microsoft Research

  24. Animation Controversy • Tversky et al. (2001) -Animation not always useful unless interactive, user controlled • Robertson, Card & Mackinlay (‘91): rotations—good for maintaining context • Bartram (‘98): emergent property of grouping when similar motions occur across a dense data display • Bederson & Boltman (‘98): 1 s. zoom reduced errors; aided spatial memory MPC-Microsoft Research

  25. Proffitt and Kaiser (’93) • Users analyze animations into relative (rotation) and common (translation) motion components • Designers of animation displays need to recognize that moving object configurations interact with their displacement perception • Secondly, rotation and translation motions have different perceptual significance • Rotations define 3D form, while translations define observer-relative displacements • This analysis suggests that the Visual Pivot sliding animation may be perceived as observer-relative while the rotating animations may be perceived as defining 3D form (shows relationships but less useful for our tasks?) MPC-Microsoft Research

  26. User Studies • Study 1: Mockup of visual pivot • Issues list guided development of prototype • Study 2: Prototype: 2D vs 3D • Visual Pivot animation was misleading • Animation speeds were too slow MPC-Microsoft Research

  27. User Studies • Study 3: Animation Styles and Speeds • Six animation styles: Picked 2 best (sliding and rotating) • Twice as fast as study 2: Still too slow • Study 4: Prototype: 2D vs 3D • Identified most effective animation style-sliding • Identified best speed range—0.5 sec. • Study 5: Examined complexity of query and sliding v. stacked animations – both effective MPC-Microsoft Research

  28. Animation Styles &Learning MPC-Microsoft Research

  29. Animation Timing MPC-Microsoft Research

  30. MPC-Microsoft Research

  31. Unresolved Problems • Hierarchy ordering • Server returns siblings in undetermined order • When 2 or more foci and pivot occurs, 2 selections may be reversed • Default is alphabetical ordering • Text Rendering: • Text rendered in 3D could provide ideal depth cues (e.g., change in size depending on distance from observer) MPC-Microsoft Research

  32. Notifications & Reminders • Over 2 years of empirical findings-> principles of notification design • Principles distributed and adopted by many notification design teams—ongoing • Ongoing work with Eric Horvitz • Research to support the design of intelligent notifications platforms • Current work is focused on reminding and reinstating context after a task switch MPC-Microsoft Research

  33. MPC-Microsoft Research

  34. MPC-Microsoft Research

  35. Messenger Math Problems MPC-Microsoft Research

  36. Attention-Based Principles of Notifications 1 • Unless you are absolutely sure the user wants to know what you’re telling them at that moment, be careful of very salient notifications • Autoarchive in Outlook • Frequent audio alerts from messenger • Users’ trust is fragile. Once they perceive a system is unreliable, it is very hard to win them back • Be cautious repeating information –it might be outdated or irritating MPC-Microsoft Research

  37. Attention-Based Principles of Notifications 2 • Make notifications situation-aware—present between “cognitive chunks” • Early in a task is the worst time to interrupt if you want user to remember what they were doing • When possible, use smart monitoring • Monitor the user (what are they doing?) • Content of interruption—relevant content less disruptive, privacy issues • Demands of current task MPC-Microsoft Research

  38. Women Take a Wider View Mary Czerwinski, Desney Tan, George Robertson Microsoft Research and CMU

  39. Large Display Efforts • Gender/FOV/Large Display Findings • Women take a wider field of view to build cognitive maps of virtual spaces • Elegant principle of nav design that benefits females without male cost • Unlocking the “code” behind principles from psychology and good design in navigation tasks MPC-Microsoft Research

  40. Prior Work—Nav & Gender • Females known to tend to navigate by landmarks in the environment • Importance of landmarks acknowledged in virtual world design (e.g., Darken, Elvins, Vinshon, etc.) • Men known to navigate by broader bearings (e.g., N, S, E & W) • Gender differences often magnified in virtual worlds (e.g., Waller, Hunt & Knap, 1998) MPC-Microsoft Research

  41. Prior Work--FOV • Much evidence that restricting FOV leads to performance decrements • Increasing FOV to 90 degrees allows overlapping sequence of fixations in memory; faster cognitive map construction • Wider FOV results in better eye-hand coordination and tracking behavior • Especially when visual complexity increases • No gender effects mentioned in literature MPC-Microsoft Research

  42. Figure . Arcturus 36" display showing study world. Experiments 1 & 2 (CHI 2001) • Examined novel navigation techniques • Used large, 36 inch display (Arcturus) • 2 rear projectors onto a a semi-curved tinted Plexiglas surface using Windows multimonitor support • 8:3 aspect ratio (twice as wide as normal displays) • 36 x 14 inches • 2048 x 768 pixel display surface • FOV = 75 degrees • Also smaller, 17 inch display (~33 degree FOV) MPC-Microsoft Research

  43. Experiment 1: Test Design • 17 users (7 female) • Procedure • Find, identify, pick up, drop cubes at target pads • Cubes scattered randomly • Participants placed 4 cubes on 4 pads in each of 4 conditions, all counterbalanced • Deadline of 5 minutes • Testing nav techniques • Measured trial times MPC-Microsoft Research

  44. World Dimensions • Tutorial world • 300 x 300 meters, 4 objects • Test world • 500 x 500, 23 objects (tents, roller coasters, and rides) • Both worlds had 4 “target cubes” and “target drop pads” • Object was to put 4 cubes on 4 corresponding pads as quickly as possible MPC-Microsoft Research

  45. Experiment 2: Conditions Chose best nav techniques from Exp. 1 Exp. 2: 3x2 within subjects design Small Display Large Display Basic navigation Speed-coupled flying with orbit Speed-coupled flying with orbit/glide MPC-Microsoft Research

  46. female Small Display male female Large Display male 50 150 250 0 100 200 Total Time per Condition (sec) MPC-Microsoft Research

  47. Experiments 1 & 2 Summary • Larger display may narrow gender gap on performance in 3D navigation • Unanswered questions… • What tasks do they enhance? Why? • What about them causes better/worse performance? • Cause of gender effect for navigation tasks? MPC-Microsoft Research

  48. Experiment 3 • Goals--replicate and extend findings from Experiment 2 • Hypothesis: wider FOV benefits females more than males • Also, better control for display size (all on one display) • DFOV to GFOV ratios identified • Design • FOV x display size x gender • 32.5 v. 75 degree FOVs, 18 & 36 inches wide displays MPC-Microsoft Research

  49. Experiment 3: Methods • 32 intermediate to advanced PC users (17 Female)--No 3D gamers • Avg. age = 41 (19 to 60 years old) • DFOV x GFOV ratios: • Small-narrow = ~1:1, small-wide=~1:2, large-narrow=~2:1, and large-wide=~1:1 • FOV means GFOV from here on out • All conditions run on large display MPC-Microsoft Research

  50. Experiment 3: Procedure • Same task as in Experiments 1 & 2 • After 4 cubes found, 3 “pointing” trials • 1 object and 1 drop pad were removed from world • Participants had to point at each object from 3 random locations (spatial memory measure) • 450 MHz Pentium II Dell computer MPC-Microsoft Research

More Related