Building and Applying a Human Cognition Model for Visual Analytics

It is well known that visual analytics addresses the difficulty of evaluating and processing large quantities of information. Less often discussed are the increasingly complex analytic and reasoning processes that must be applied in order to accomplish that goal. Success of the visual analytics approach will require us to develop new visualization models that predict how computational processes might facilitate human insight and guide the flow of human reasoning. In this paper, we seek to advance visualization methods by proposing a framework for human ‘higher cognition’ that extends more familiar perceptual models. Based on this approach, we suggest guidelines for the development of visual interfaces that better integrate complementary capabilities of humans and computers. Although many of these recommendations are novel, some can be found in existing visual analytics applications. In the latter case, much of the value of our contribution lies in the deeper rationale that the model provides for those principles. Lastly, we assess these visual analytics guidelines through the evaluation of several visualization examples.

[1]  Jarke J. van Wijk,et al.  The value of visualization , 2005, VIS 05. IEEE Visualization, 2005..

[2]  M. Tarr,et al.  Learning to see faces and objects , 2003, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[3]  Michael J. Spivey,et al.  The Continuity Of Mind , 2008 .

[4]  L. Komatsu Recent views of conceptual structure , 1992 .

[5]  Jianping Fan,et al.  Semantic Image Browser: Bridging Information Visualization with Automated Intelligent Image Analysis , 2006, 2006 IEEE Symposium On Visual Analytics Science And Technology.

[6]  John R Anderson,et al.  An integrated theory of the mind. , 2004, Psychological review.

[7]  John T. Stasko,et al.  Jigsaw: Supporting Investigative Analysis through Interactive Visualization , 2007, 2007 IEEE Symposium on Visual Analytics Science and Technology.

[8]  William Ribarsky,et al.  Using a human cognition model in the creation of collaborative knowledge visualizations , 2008, SPIE Defense + Commercial Sensing.

[9]  Allen Newell,et al.  The psychology of human-computer interaction , 1983 .

[10]  P. Pollard,et al.  On the conflict between logic and belief in syllogistic reasoning , 1983, Memory & cognition.

[11]  P. Cherubini,et al.  From models to rules: mechanization of reasoning as a way to cope with cognitive overloading in combinatorial problems. , 2004, Acta psychologica.

[12]  Timothy D. Wilson,et al.  Thinking too much: introspection can reduce the quality of preferences and decisions. , 1991, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[13]  Peter Pirolli,et al.  Computational models of information scent-following in a very large browsable text collection , 1997, CHI.

[14]  G. A. Miller THE PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW THE MAGICAL NUMBER SEVEN, PLUS OR MINUS TWO: SOME LIMITS ON OUR CAPACITY FOR PROCESSING INFORMATION 1 , 1956 .

[15]  James D. Hollan,et al.  Pad++: a zooming graphical interface for exploring alternate interface physics , 1994, UIST '94.

[16]  Gary E. Raney,et al.  An eye movement study of insight problem solving , 2001, Memory & cognition.

[17]  Allison Woodruff,et al.  Guidelines for using multiple views in information visualization , 2000, AVI '00.

[18]  G Gigerenzer,et al.  Reasoning the fast and frugal way: models of bounded rationality. , 1996, Psychological review.

[19]  P. Pirolli,et al.  The Sensemaking Process and Leverage Points for Analyst Technology as Identified Through Cognitive Task Analysis , 2007 .

[20]  Jaakko Hintikka,et al.  On the Logic of Perception , 1969 .

[21]  Richards J. Heuer,et al.  Psychology of Intelligence Analysis , 1999 .

[22]  Józef Kozielecki Psychological Decision Theory , 1981 .

[23]  Edward M. Bowden,et al.  New approaches to demystifying insight , 2005, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[24]  P. Wason On the Failure to Eliminate Hypotheses in a Conceptual Task , 1960 .

[25]  Z. Pylyshyn Seeing and Visualizing: It's Not What You Think , 2003 .

[26]  Jean Piaget Piaget’s Theory , 1976 .

[27]  I. Biederman Recognition-by-components: a theory of human image understanding. , 1987, Psychological review.

[28]  G. Scheuermann,et al.  Investigative Visual Analysis of Global Terrorism , 2008 .

[29]  William Ribarsky,et al.  WireVis: Visualization of Categorical, Time-Varying Data From Financial Transactions , 2007, 2007 IEEE Symposium on Visual Analytics Science and Technology.

[30]  S. Ullman Visual routines , 1984, Cognition.

[31]  A. Newell You can't play 20 questions with nature and win : projective comments on the papers of this symposium , 1973 .

[32]  James J. Thomas,et al.  Visualizing the non-visual: spatial analysis and interaction with information from text documents , 1995, Proceedings of Visualization 1995 Conference.

[33]  Ronald A. Rensink The Dynamic Representation of Scenes , 2000 .

[34]  William Ribarsky,et al.  GVis: A Scalable Visualization Framework for Genomic Data , 2005, EuroVis.

[35]  William Ribarsky,et al.  Visual analytics for complex concepts using a human cognition model , 2008, 2008 IEEE Symposium on Visual Analytics Science and Technology.

[36]  William Ribarsky,et al.  NewsLab: Exploratory Broadcast News Video Analysis , 2007, 2007 IEEE Symposium on Visual Analytics Science and Technology.

[37]  Wayne D. Gray,et al.  Milliseconds Matter: an Introduction to Microstrategies and to Their Use in Describing and Predicting Interactive Behavior Milliseconds Matter: an Introduction to Microstrategies and to Their Use in Describing and Predicting Interactive Behavior , 2022 .

[38]  Richard May,et al.  Scalable visual reasoning: Supporting collaboration through distributed analysis , 2007, 2007 International Symposium on Collaborative Technologies and Systems.

[39]  William Ribarsky,et al.  Legible Cities: Focus-Dependent Multi-Resolution Visualization of Urban Relationships , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.