Consensus Building in Collaborative Sequencing with Visual Awareness

Collaborative Sequencing (CoSeq) is the process by which a group selects and arranges a set of items into a particular order. CoSeq is ubiquitous, occurring across diverse situations like trip planning or course scheduling. Although indicating preferences, communicating, and consensus building in CoSeq can be overwhelming for groups, little research has aimed at effectively supporting this process. To understand the design space of CoSeq, we ran a formative study to observe how participants utilize visualizations to strategically reduce their cognitive burden. We derived a novel design to enable sequence comparison using visualizations and evaluated its effect through a study. We found that attitudinal measures for the efficiency and effectiveness of the consensus building process were significantly improved with our design.

[1]  Ben Shneiderman,et al.  EventAction: Visual analytics for temporal event sequence recommendation , 2016, 2016 IEEE Conference on Visual Analytics Science and Technology (VAST).

[2]  Philip Bille,et al.  A survey on tree edit distance and related problems , 2005, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[3]  Susan R. Fussell,et al.  Effects of Sensemaking Translucence on Distributed Collaborative Analysis , 2016, CSCW.

[4]  Andreas Mojzisch,et al.  The Negative Effect of Learning the Other Group Members ’ Preferences on Decision Quality , 2010 .

[5]  Shou-De Lin,et al.  TripRec: recommending trip routes from large scale check-in data , 2012, WWW.

[6]  Michael Gleicher,et al.  Considerations for Visualizing Comparison , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[7]  L. Susskind,et al.  The consensus building handbook : a comprehensive guide to reaching agreement , 1999 .

[8]  Ming Yang,et al.  ConsensUs: Supporting Multi-Criteria Group Decisions by Visualizing Points of Disagreement , 2018, ACM Trans. Soc. Comput..

[9]  Xuelong Li,et al.  A survey of graph edit distance , 2010, Pattern Analysis and Applications.

[10]  L. Morris,et al.  Collaborative Course Development for Online Courses , 2007 .

[11]  Cong Yu,et al.  Automatic construction of travel itineraries using social breadcrumbs , 2010, HT '10.

[12]  Alexander Felfernig,et al.  Counteracting Anchoring Effects in Group Decision Making , 2015, UMAP.

[13]  Juho Kim,et al.  Collaborative Dynamic Queries: Supporting Distributed Small Group Decision-making , 2018, CHI.

[14]  Tobias Isenberg,et al.  Weighted graph comparison techniques for brain connectivity analysis , 2013, CHI.

[15]  Nonnadda Silamai,et al.  TripRec: trip plan recommendation system that enhances hotel services , 2017, UbiComp/ISWC Adjunct.

[16]  Susan R. Fussell,et al.  Effects of implicit sharing in collaborative analysis , 2014, CHI.

[17]  Kwan Hui Lim,et al.  Travel Itinerary Recommendations with Must-see Points-of-Interest , 2018, WWW.

[18]  Robert O. Briggs,et al.  AIS Electronic Library (AISeL) , 2018 .

[19]  Krzysztof Z. Gajos,et al.  Human computation tasks with global constraints , 2012, CHI.

[20]  Joseph Rafidi.  Real-time trip planning with the crowd , 2013, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[21]  Sana Malik,et al.  Personalizable and Interactive Sequence Recommender System , 2018, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[22]  Katia Passerini,et al.  Seeing is believing (or at least changing your mind): The influence of visibility and task complexity on preference changes in computer‐supported team decision making , 2016, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[23]  Takuji Narumi,et al.  Xnavi: Travel Planning System Based on Experience Flows , 2018, Proc. ACM Interact. Mob. Wearable Ubiquitous Technol..

[24]  Francisco Herrera,et al.  Visualizing Consensus in Group Decision Making Situations , 2007, 2007 IEEE International Fuzzy Systems Conference.

[25]  Keith Andrews,et al.  Visual Graph Comparison , 2009, 2009 13th International Conference Information Visualisation.