Visualization as Seen through its Research Paper Keywords

We present the results of a comprehensive multi-pass analysis of visualization paper keywords supplied by authors for their papers published in the IEEE Visualization conference series (now called IEEE VIS) between 1990-2015. From this analysis we derived a set of visualization topics that we discuss in the context of the current taxonomy that is used to categorize papers and assign reviewers in the IEEE VIS reviewing process. We point out missing and overemphasized topics in the current taxonomy and start a discussion on the importance of establishing common visualization terminology. Our analysis of research topics in visualization can, thus, serve as a starting point to (a) help create a common vocabulary to improve communication among different visualization sub-groups, (b) facilitate the process of understanding differences and commonalities of the various research sub-fields in visualization, (c) provide an understanding of emerging new research trends, (d) facilitate the crucial step of finding the right reviewers for research submissions, and (e) it can eventually lead to a comprehensive taxonomy of visualization research. One additional tangible outcome of our work is an online query tool (http://keyvis.org/) that allows visualization researchers to easily browse the 3952 keywords used for IEEE VIS papers since 1990 to find related work or make informed keyword choices.

[1]  Chaomei Chen,et al.  How are they different? A quantitative domain comparison of information visualization and data visualization (2000–2014) , 2016, Scientometrics.

[2]  Jean Pierre Courtial,et al.  The dynamics of research in the psychology of work from 1973 to 1987: From the study of companies to the study of professions , 1991, Scientometrics.

[3]  Charu C. Aggarwal,et al.  Data Clustering , 2013 .

[4]  S. Bradford.  "Sources of information on specific subjects" by S.C. Bradford , 1985 .

[5]  Ed H. Chi,et al.  A taxonomy of visualization techniques using the data state reference model , 2000, IEEE Symposium on Information Visualization 2000. INFOVIS 2000. Proceedings.

[6]  M. Sheelagh T. Carpendale,et al.  Empirical Studies in Information Visualization: Seven Scenarios , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[7]  Jean Pierre Courtial,et al.  Co-word analysis as a tool for describing the network of interactions between basic and technological research: The case of polymer chemsitry , 1991, Scientometrics.

[8]  Henry G. Small,et al.  Mapping the dynamics of science and technology , 1988, Scientometrics.

[9]  R. Jordan Crouser,et al.  Online Submission ID: 200 An Affordance-Based Framework for Human Computation and Human-Computer Collaboration , 2022 .

[10]  Yong Liu,et al.  A co-word analysis of library and information science in China , 2013, Scientometrics.

[11]  Alan Singleton,et al.  Bibliometrics and Citation Analysis; from the Science Citation Index to Cybermetrics , 2010, Learn. Publ..

[12]  Ben Shneiderman,et al.  Readings in information visualization - using vision to think , 1999 .

[13]  John T. Stasko,et al.  Combining Computational Analyses and Interactive Visualization for Document Exploration and Sensemaking in Jigsaw , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[14]  Michael I. Jordan,et al.  Latent Dirichlet Allocation , 2001, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[15]  Charles Hansen,et al.  The Visualization Handbook , 2011 .

[16]  Tobias Isenberg,et al.  A Systematic Review on the Practice of Evaluating Visualization , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[17]  Tobias Isenberg,et al.  Visualization on Interactive Surfaces: A Research Overview , 2013 .

[18]  Qin He,et al.  Knowledge Discovery Through Co-Word Analysis , 1999, Libr. Trends.

[19]  Hans-Jörg Schulz,et al.  Treevis.net: A Tree Visualization Reference , 2011, IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications.

[20]  John Whittaker,et al.  Creativity and Conformity in Science: Titles, Keywords and Co-word Analysis , 1989 .

[21]  J. H. Ward.  Hierarchical Grouping to Optimize an Objective Function , 1963 .

[22]  Ben Shneiderman,et al.  Interactive Dynamics for Visual Analysis , 2012 .

[23]  John T. Stasko,et al.  Toward a Deeper Understanding of the Role of Interaction in Information Visualization , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[24]  A. Skupin,et al.  Visualizing the Topical Structure of the Medical Sciences: A Self-Organizing Map Approach , 2013, PloS one.

[25]  Melanie Tory,et al.  Human factors in visualization research , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[26]  Jeffrey Heer,et al.  Topic Model Diagnostics: Assessing Domain Relevance via Topical Alignment , 2013, ICML.

[27]  Colin Ware,et al.  Information Visualization: Perception for Design , 2000 .

[28]  Albert D. Ritzhaupt,et al.  An investigation of distance education in North American research literature using co-word analysis , 2010 .

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

[30]  Jiawan Zhang,et al.  A text visualization method for cross-domain research topic mining , 2016, J. Vis..

[31]  E. L. Harder,et al.  The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. , 2019, 2019 IEEE International Conference on Software Architecture Companion (ICSA-C).

[32]  Heidi Lam,et al.  A Framework of Interaction Costs in Information Visualization , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[33]  Jaegul Choo,et al.  CiteVis : Exploring Conference Paper Citation Data Visually , 2013 .

[34]  Enrico Bertini,et al.  Quality Metrics in High-Dimensional Data Visualization: An Overview and Systematization , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[35]  Boleslaw K. Szymanski,et al.  Trends in computer science research , 2013, Commun. ACM.

[36]  Ronald N. Kostoff,et al.  The metrics of science and technology , 2001, Scientometrics.

[37]  LiuYong,et al.  A co-word analysis of library and information science in China , 2013 .

[38]  Antonio Gabriel López-Herrera,et al.  An application of co-word analysis and bibliometric maps for detecting the most highlighting themes in the consumer behaviour research from a longitudinal perspective , 2012 .

[39]  Ben Shneiderman,et al.  The eyes have it: a task by data type taxonomy for information visualizations , 1996, Proceedings 1996 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages.

[40]  N. McGlynn.  Thinking fast and slow. , 2014, Australian veterinary journal.

[41]  Neal S. Coulter,et al.  Software Engineering as Seen through Its Research Literature: A Study in Co-Word Analysis , 1998, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[42]  J. T. Curtis,et al.  An Ordination of the Upland Forest Communities of Southern Wisconsin , 1957 .

[43]  A. Parry.  Handbook of Qualitative Research , 2002 .

[44]  Yateendra Joshi.  Why do journals ask for keywords , 2014 .

[45]  Jorge Gonçalves,et al.  CHI 1994-2013: mapping two decades of intellectual progress through co-word analysis , 2014, CHI.

[46]  Kristin A. Cook,et al.  Illuminating the Path: The Research and Development Agenda for Visual Analytics , 2005 .

[47]  Eliezer Geisler.  The Metrics of Science and Technology , 2000 .

[48]  Jean Pierre Courtial,et al.  Policy and the mapping of scientific change: A co-word analysis of research into environmental acidification , 1988, Scientometrics.

[49]  Hui-Ling Wang,et al.  A co-word analysis of digital library field in China , 2012, Scientometrics.