1,720,999 research outputs found
La visualisation d’information pour la prise de décision : identifier les biais et aller au-delà du paradigme de l'analyse visuelle
No full textThere are problems neither humans nor computers can solve alone. Computer-supported visualizations are a well-known solution when humans need to reason based on a large amount of data. The more effective a visualization, the more complex the problems that can be solved. In information visualization research, to be considered effective, a visualization typically needs to support data comprehension. Evaluation methods focus on whether users indeed understand the displayed data, can gain insights and are able to perform a set of analytic tasks, e.g., to identify if two variables are correlated. This dissertation suggests moving beyond this "visual analysis paradigm" by extending research focus to another type of task: decision making. Decision tasks are essential to everybody, from the manager of a company who needs to routinely make risky decisions to an ordinary person who wants to choose a career life path or simply find a camera to buy. Yet decisions do not merely involve information understanding and are difficult to study. Decision tasks can involve subjective preferences, do not always have a clear ground truth, and they often depend on external knowledge which may not be part of the displayed dataset. Nevertheless, decision tasks are neither part of visualization task taxonomies nor formally defined. Moreover, visualization research lacks metrics, methodologies and empirical works that validate the effectiveness of visualizations in supporting a decision. This dissertation provides an operational definition for a particular class of decision tasks and reports a systematic analysis to investigate the extent to which existing multidimensional visualizations are compatible with such tasks. It further reports on the first empirical comparison of multidimensional visualizations for their ability to support decisions and outlines a methodology and metrics to assess decision accuracy. It further explores the role of instructions in both decision tasks and equivalent analytic tasks, and identifies differences in accuracy between those tasks. Similarly to vision science that informs visualization researchers and practitioners on the limitations of human vision, moving beyond the visual analysis paradigm would mean acknowledging the limitations of human reasoning. This dissertation reviews decision theory to understand how humans should, could and do make decisions and formulates a new taxonomy of cognitive biases based on the user task where such biases occur. It further empirically shows that cognitive biases can be present even when information is well-visualized, and that a decision can be ``correct'' yet irrational, in the sense that people's decisions are influenced by irrelevant information. This dissertation finally examines how biases can be alleviated. Current methods for improving human reasoning often involve extensive training on abstract principles and procedures that often appear ineffective. Yet visualizations have an ace up their sleeve: visualization designers can re-design the environment to alter the way people process the data. This dissertation revisits decision theory to identify possible design solutions. It further empirically demonstrates that enriching a visualization with interactions that facilitate alternative decision strategies can yield more rational decisions. Through empirical studies, this dissertation suggests that the visual analysis paradigm cannot fully address the challenges of visualization-supported decision making, but that moving beyond can contribute to making visualization a powerful decision support tool.Certains problèmes ne peuvent être résolus ni par les ordinateurs seuls ni par les humains seuls. La visualisation d'information est une solution commune quand il est nécessaire de raisonner sur de grandes quantités de données. Plus une visualisation est efficace, plus il est possible de résoudre des problèmes complexes. Dans la recherche en visualisation d'information, une visualisation est généralement considérée comme efficace quand elle permet de comprendre les données. Les méthodes d'évaluation cherchent à déterminer si les utilisateurs comprennent les données affichées et sont capables d'effectuer des tâches analytiques comme, par exemple, identifier si deux variables sont corrélées. Cette thèse suggère d'aller au-delà de ce ``paradigme de l'analyse visuelle'' et élargir le champ de recherche à un autre type de tâche: la prise de décision. Les tâches de décision sont essentielles à tous, du directeur d'entreprise qui doit prendre des décisions importantes à l'individu ordinaire qui choisit un plan de carrière ou désire simplement acheter un appareil photo. Néanmoins, les décisions ne se résument pas à la simple compréhension de l'information et sont difficiles à étudier. Elles peuvent impliquer des préférences subjectives, n'ont pas toujours de vérité de terrain, et dépendent souvent de connaissances externes aux données visualisées. Pourtant, les tâches de décision ne font pas partie des taxonomies de tâches en visualisation et n'ont pas été bien définies. De plus, la recherche manque de métriques, de méthodes et de travaux empiriques pour valider l'efficacité des visualisations pour la prise de décision. Cette thèse offre une définition opérationnelle pour une classe particulière de tâches de décision, et présente une analyse systématique qui identifie les visualisations multidimensionnelles compatibles avec ces tâches. Elle présente en outre la première comparaison empirique de techniques de visualisation multidimensionnelle basée sur leur capacité à aider la décision, et esquisse une méthodologie et des métriques pour évaluer la qualité des décisions. Elle explore ensuite le rôle des instructions dans les tâches de décision et des tâches analytiques équivalentes, et identifie des différences de performance entre les deux tâches. De même que les sciences de la vision informent la visualisation d'information sur les limites de la vision humaine, aller au-delà du paradigme de l'analyse visuelle implique de prendre en compte les limites du raisonnement humain. Cette thèse passe en revue la théorie de la décision afin de mieux comprendre comment les humains prennent des décisions, et formule une nouvelle taxonomie de biais cognitifs basée sur la tâche utilisateur. En outre, elle démontre empiriquement que des biais peuvent être présents même quand l'information est bien visualisée, et qu'une décision peut être ``correcte'' mais néanmoins irrationnelle, dans le sens où elle est influencée par des informations non pertinentes. Cette thèse examine finalement comment mitiger les biais. Les méthodes pour améliorer le raisonnement humain reposent souvent sur un entraînement intensif à des principes et à des procédures abstraites, qui se révèlent souvent peu efficaces. Les visualisations offrent une opportunité dans la mesure où ses concepteurs peuvent remodeler l'environnement pour changer la façon dont les utilisateurs assimilent les données. Cette thèse passe en revue la théorie de la décision pour identifier de possibles solutions de conception. De plus, elle démontre empiriquement que supplémenter une visualisation par des interactions qui facilitent des stratégies de décision alternatives peut mener à des décisions plus rationnelles. Via des études empiriques, cette thèse suggère que le paradigme de l'analyse visuelle n'est pas en mesure de relever tous les défis de la prise de décision aidée de la visualisation, mais qu'aller au-delà peut contribuer à faire de la visualisation un puissant outil de prise de décision
A Critical Reflection on Visualization Research: Where Do Decision Making Tasks Hide?
Full text linkIt has been widely suggested that a key goal of visualization systems is to assist decision making, but is this true? We conduct a critical investigation on whether the activity of decision making is indeed central to the visualization domain. By approaching decision making as a user task, we explore the degree to which decision tasks are evident in visualization research and user studies. Our analysis suggests that decision tasks are not commonly found in current visualization task taxonomies and that the visualization field has yet to leverage guidance from decision theory domains on how to study such tasks. We further found that the majority of visualizations addressing decision making were not evaluated based on their ability to assist decision tasks. Finally, to help expand the impact of visual analytics in organizational as well as casual decision making activities, we initiate a research agenda on how decision making assistance could be elevated throughout visualization research
Aiding Humans in Financial Fraud Decision Making: Toward an XAI-Visualization Framework
Full text linkAI prevails in financial fraud detection and decision making. Yet, due to concerns about biased automated decision making or profiling, regulations mandate that final decisions are made by humans. Financial fraud investigators face the challenge of manually synthesizing vast amounts of unstructured information, including AI alerts, transaction histories, social media insights, and governmental laws. Current Visual Analytics (VA) systems primarily support isolated aspects of this process, such as explaining binary AI alerts and visualizing transaction patterns, thus adding yet another layer of information to the overall complexity. In this work, we propose a framework where the VA system supports decision makers throughout all stages of financial fraud investigation, including data collection, information synthesis, and human criteria iteration. We illustrate how VA can claim a central role in AI-aided decision making, ensuring that human judgment remains in control while minimizing potential biases and labor-intensive tasks.Accepted poster at IEEE VIS \u2724, Florida, USA, 13-18 October, 202
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
What is Interaction for Data Visualization?
Full text linkInternational audienceInteraction is fundamental to data visualization, but what "interaction" means in the context of visualization is ambiguous and confusing. We argue that this confusion is due to a lack of consensual definition. To tackle this problem, we start by synthesizing an inclusive view of interaction in the visualization community-including insights from information visualization, visual analytics and scientific visualization, as well as the input of both senior and junior visualization researchers. Once this view takes shape, we look at how interaction is defined in the field of human-computer interaction (HCI). By extracting commonalities and differences between the views of interaction in visualization and in HCI, we synthesize a definition of interaction for visualization. Our definition is meant to be a thinking tool and inspire novel and bolder interaction design practices. We hope that by better understanding what interaction in visualization is and what it can be, we will enrich the quality of interaction in visualization systems and empower those who use them
Variations on the Author
Full text link“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Full text linkWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
Full text linkWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
- …
