Insights From Experiments With Rigor in an EvoBio Design Study

Design study is an established approach of conducting problem-driven visualization research. The academic visualization community has produced a large body of work for reporting on design studies, informed by a handful of theoretical frameworks, and applied to a broad range of application areas. The result is an abundance of reported insights into visualization design, with an emphasis on novel visualization techniques and systems as the primary contribution of these studies. In recent work we proposed a new, interpretivist perspective on design study and six companion criteria for rigor that highlight the opportunities for researchers to contribute knowledge that extends beyond visualization idioms and software. In this work we conducted a year-long collaboration with evolutionary biologists to develop an interactive tool for visual exploration of multivariate datasets and phylogenetic trees. During this design study we experimented with methods to support three of the rigor criteria: ABUNDANT, REFLEXIVE, and TRANSPARENT. As a result we contribute two novel visualization techniques for the analysis of multivariate phylogenetic datasets, three methodological recommendations for conducting design studies drawn from reflections over our process of experimentation, and two writing devices for reporting interpretivist design study. We offer this work as an example for implementing the rigor criteria to produce a diverse range of knowledge contributions.

[1]  D. Schoen,et al.  The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action , 1985 .

[2]  Andrew K. Shenton Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects , 2004, Educ. Inf..

[3]  L. Finlay Negotiating the swamp: the opportunity and challenge of reflexivity in research practice , 2002 .

[4]  Michael Sedlmair,et al.  Design Study Contributions Come in Different Guises: Seven Guiding Scenarios , 2016, BELIV '16.

[5]  Guangchuang Yu,et al.  Using ggtree to Visualize Data on Tree‐Like Structures , 2020, Current protocols in bioinformatics.

[6]  Yvonna S. Lincoln,et al.  Establishing Dependability and Confirmability in Naturalistic Inquiry Through an Audit. , 1982 .

[7]  Dietmar Offenhuber,et al.  Data by Proxy — Material Traces as Autographic Visualizations , 2019, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[8]  J. Morse The Changing Face of Qualitative Inquiry , 2020 .

[9]  Tamara Munzner,et al.  Aggregated Dendrograms for Visual Comparison between Many Phylogenetic Trees , 2020, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[10]  D. Huson,et al.  Dendroscope 3: an interactive tool for rooted phylogenetic trees and networks. , 2012, Systematic biology.

[11]  Remco R. Bouckaert,et al.  DensiTree: making sense of sets of phylogenetic trees , 2010, Bioinform..

[12]  Dieter Schmalstieg,et al.  Pathfinder: Visual Analysis of Paths in Graphs , 2016, Comput. Graph. Forum.

[13]  A. Daley Reflections on Reflexivity and Critical Reflection as Critical Research Practices , 2010 .

[14]  Tamara Munzner,et al.  Design Study Methodology: Reflections from the Trenches and the Stacks , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[15]  Silvia Lindtner,et al.  Design(ing) 'Here' and 'There': Tech Entrepreneurs, Global Markets, and Reflexivity in Design Processes , 2016, CHI.

[16]  Nathan Salmon,et al.  Reflexivity , 1986, Notre Dame J. Formal Log..

[17]  S. Brookfield Critically reflective practice , 1998 .

[18]  Jennifer Ann Rode,et al.  Reflexivity in digital anthropology , 2011, CHI.

[19]  H. Tsoukas,et al.  What is Reflection-in-Action? A Phenomenological Account , 2009 .

[20]  Arvind Satyanarayan,et al.  Critical Reflections on Visualization Authoring Systems , 2019, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[21]  Michael S. Horn,et al.  The DeepTree Exhibit: Visualizing the Tree of Life to Facilitate Informal Learning , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[22]  R. J. Bogumil,et al.  The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action , 1985, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[23]  Alexander Lex,et al.  The State of the Art in Visualizing Multivariate Networks , 2019, Comput. Graph. Forum.

[24]  Liam J. Revell,et al.  phytools: an R package for phylogenetic comparative biology (and other things) , 2012 .

[25]  Shaowen Bardzell,et al.  Feminist HCI: taking stock and outlining an agenda for design , 2010, CHI.

[26]  Tamara Munzner,et al.  A Nested Model for Visualization Design and Validation , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[27]  Liam J. Revell,et al.  Two new graphical methods for mapping trait evolution on phylogenies , 2013 .

[28]  D. Macbeth,et al.  On “Reflexivity” in Qualitative Research: Two Readings, and a Third , 2001 .

[29]  Tamara Munzner,et al.  Overview: The Design, Adoption, and Analysis of a Visual Document Mining Tool for Investigative Journalists , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[30]  John Zimmerman,et al.  Research through design as a method for interaction design research in HCI , 2007, CHI.

[31]  Nigel Cross,et al.  Expertise in Design: an overview , 2004 .

[32]  Jason Dykes,et al.  Design Exposition with Literate Visualization , 2019, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[33]  William W. Gaver,et al.  Annotated portfolios , 2012, INTR.

[34]  Kyle Wm. Hall,et al.  Design by Immersion: A Transdisciplinary Approach to Problem-Driven Visualizations , 2019, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[35]  S. Mantzoukas The inclusion of bias in reflective and reflexive research , 2005 .

[36]  J. Kessels,et al.  Linking Practice and Theory: The Pedagogy of Realistic Teacher Education , 2001 .

[37]  Alexander Lex,et al.  Lineage: Visualizing Multivariate Clinical Data in Genealogy Graphs , 2017, bioRxiv.

[38]  Miriah D. Meyer,et al.  A Framework for Externalizing Implicit Error Using Visualization , 2019, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[39]  Sarah J. Tracy Qualitative Quality: Eight “Big-Tent” Criteria for Excellent Qualitative Research , 2010 .

[40]  P. Bork,et al.  Interactive Tree Of Life (iTOL) v4: recent updates and new developments , 2019, Nucleic Acids Res..

[41]  Max L. Wilson,et al.  Transparency in Qualitative Research: Increasing Fairness in the CHI Review Process , 2020, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[42]  Chat Wacharamanotham,et al.  Transparency of CHI Research Artifacts: Results of a Self-Reported Survey , 2019, CHI.

[43]  Pieter Jan Stappers,et al.  Doing Design as a Part of Doing Research , 2007 .

[44]  Björn Hartmann,et al.  Pictionaire: supporting collaborative design work by integrating physical and digital artifacts , 2010, CSCW '10.

[45]  Susanne Bødker,et al.  When second wave HCI meets third wave challenges , 2006, NordiCHI '06.

[46]  James Agutter,et al.  Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics Design Activity Framework for Visualization Design , 2014 .

[47]  J. Diniz‐Filho,et al.  Phylogenetic analyses: comparing species to infer adaptations and physiological mechanisms. , 2012, Comprehensive Physiology.

[48]  L. Harmon,et al.  OneZoom: A Fractal Explorer for the Tree of Life , 2012, PLoS biology.

[49]  D. Haraway Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective , 1988 .

[50]  Richard Buchanan,et al.  Wicked Problems in Design Thinking , 1992 .

[51]  Miriah D. Meyer,et al.  Poemage: Visualizing the Sonic Topology of a Poem , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[52]  Patricia Williams,et al.  The Critically Reflective Practitioner , 2011 .

[53]  Mary Czerwinski,et al.  CandidTree: visualizing structural uncertainty in similar hierarchies , 2007, Inf. Vis..

[54]  Daniel L. Schwartz,et al.  Parallel prototyping leads to better design results, more divergence, and increased self-efficacy , 2010, TCHI.

[55]  N. Cross Design Research: a disciplined conversation , 1999 .

[56]  Natalia Kovalyova,et al.  Data feminism , 2020, Information, Communication & Society.

[57]  Rahul C. Basole,et al.  Duet: Helping Data Analysis Novices Conduct Pairwise Comparisons by Minimal Specification , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[58]  Tamara Munzner,et al.  The nested blocks and guidelines model , 2015, Inf. Vis..

[59]  K. McGannon,et al.  Developing rigor in qualitative research: problems and opportunities within sport and exercise psychology , 2017 .

[60]  Ben Shneiderman,et al.  Visualizing Change over Time Using Dynamic Hierarchies: TreeVersity2 and the StemView , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[61]  John Zimmerman,et al.  The Role of Design Artifacts in Design Theory Construction , 2008 .

[62]  Alexander Lex,et al.  Juniper: A Tree+Table Approach to Multivariate Graph Visualization , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[63]  D. K. Hammer,et al.  STRUCTURED REFLECTION FOR IMPROVING DESIGN PROCESSES , 2002 .

[64]  Anouschka van Leeuwen,et al.  Reflections and Review on the Audit Procedure: Guidelines for More Transparency , 2018 .

[65]  Sara Jones,et al.  A Framework for Creative Visualization-Opportunities Workshops , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[66]  Bill Buxton,et al.  Sketching User Experiences: Getting the Design Right and the Right Design , 2007 .

[67]  Marian Carcary,et al.  The Research Audit Trial - Enhancing Trustworthiness in Qualitative Inquiry , 2009 .

[68]  Michelle A. Borkin,et al.  Design Study "Lite" Methodology: Expediting Design Studies and Enabling the Synergy of Visualization Pedagogy and Social Good , 2020, CHI.

[69]  John Bowers,et al.  The logic of annotated portfolios: communicating the value of 'research through design' , 2012, DIS '12.

[70]  A. Moravcsik Transparency: The Revolution in Qualitative Research , 2013, PS: Political Science & Politics.

[71]  Niklas Elmqvist,et al.  Towards Characterizing Domain Experts as a User Group , 2018, 2018 IEEE Evaluation and Beyond - Methodological Approaches for Visualization (BELIV).

[72]  Mieke Brekelmans,et al.  Auditing Quality of Research in Social Sciences , 2008 .

[73]  S. Timmermans,et al.  Abductive Analysis: Theorizing Qualitative Research , 2014 .

[74]  Jason Dykes,et al.  Reflection on Reflection in Applied Visualization Research , 2018, IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications.

[75]  Sandeep Purao,et al.  Action Design Research , 2011, MIS Q..

[76]  Serdar Tasiran,et al.  TreeJuxtaposer: scalable tree comparison using Focus+Context with guaranteed visibility , 2003, ACM Trans. Graph..

[77]  C. Campbell Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions Award for Excellence in Research, 2006 , 2007 .

[78]  Cody Dunne,et al.  IDMVis: Temporal Event Sequence Visualization for Type 1 Diabetes Treatment Decision Support , 2019, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[79]  Uta Hinrichs,et al.  Speculative Practices: Utilizing InfoVis to Explore Untapped Literary Collections , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[80]  D. Mahler,et al.  SURFACE: detecting convergent evolution from comparative data by fitting Ornstein‐Uhlenbeck models with stepwise Akaike Information Criterion , 2013 .

[81]  Jason Dykes,et al.  Criteria for Rigor in Visualization Design Study , 2019, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[82]  Daniel A. Keim,et al.  Bridging the Gap of Domain and Visualization Experts with a Liaison , 2015, EuroVis.

[83]  Jason Dykes,et al.  Action Design Research and Visualization Design , 2016, BELIV '16.