Modeling User Strategies on Interactive Information Dashboards
Pages 191 - 201
Abstract
Interacting with and making sense of information dashboards is often problematic. Typically, users develop strategies to go around and overcome these problems. These strategies can be conceived as behavioural markers of cognitive processes that indicate problematic interactions. Consequently, if we were able to computationally model these strategies, we could detect if users are encountering problems in real time (and act accordingly). We conducted an experiment (N=63) to identify the interaction strategies users employ on problematic dashboards. We found that while existing challenges impact significantly on user performance, interventions to mitigate such challenges were especially beneficial for those with lower graph literacy. We identified the strategies employed by users when encountering problems: extensive page exploration as a reaction to information overload and use of customisation functionalities when understanding data is problematic. We also found that some strategies are indicators of performance in terms of task completion time and effectiveness: extensive exploration strategies were indicators of lower performance, while the exhibition of customisation strategies is associated with higher effectiveness.
Supplementary Material
Modeling user strategies on interactive information dashboards presentation for UMAP 2022 by Mohammed Alhamadi. We found (1) users' effectiveness to improve on adapted dashboards, (2) users? graph literacy impacts performance on dashboard and (3) users exhibit different interaction strategies when facing problems compared to when they are not facing any.
- Download
- 19.35 MB
References
[1]
Ünal Aksu, Adela del Río-Ortega, Manuel Resinas, and Hajo A Reijers. 2019. An Approach for the Automated Generation of Engaging Dashboards. In OTM Confederated International Conferences” On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems”. Springer, 363–384.
[2]
Sakinah SJ Alhadad. 2016. Attentional and cognitive processing of analytics visualisations: Can design features affect interpretations and decisions about learning and teaching. Show Me The Learning. Proceedings ASCILITE(2016), 20–32.
[3]
Aitor Apaolaza and Markel Vigo. 2017. WevQuery: testing hypotheses about web interaction patterns. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 1, EICS(2017), 1–17.
[4]
CDC. 2020. COVIDView. Retrieved April 10, 2020 from cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-data/covidview/
[5]
Sven Charleer, Kathrin Gerling, Francisco Gutiérrez, Hans Cauwenbergh, Bram Luycx, and Katrien Verbert. 2018. Real-time dashboards to support esports spectating. In Proceedings of the 2018 Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play. 59–71.
[6]
Mon Chu Chen, John R. Anderson, and Myeong Ho Sohn. 2001. What Can a Mouse Cursor Tell Us More?: Correlation of Eye/Mouse Movements on Web Browsing. In CHI ’01 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Seattle, Washington) (CHI EA ’01). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 281–282. https://doi.org/10.1145/634067.634234
[7]
Joan Morris DiMicco and Nancy Mann. 2016. User research to inform product design: turning failure into small successes. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 872–879.
[8]
ECDC. 2021. ECDC Dashboards. Retrieved April 15, 2021 from qap.ecdc.europa.eu/public/extensions/covid-19/covid-19.html
[9]
Claudia Ehmke and Stephanie Wilson. 2007. Identifying Web Usability Problems from Eye-tracking Data. In Proceedings of the 21st British HCI Group Annual Conference on People and Computers (University of Lancaster, United Kingdom) (BCS-HCI ’07). British Computer Society, Swinton, UK, 119–128.
[10]
Stephen Few. 2006. Information dashboard design: The effective visual communication of data. O’Reilly Media, Inc.
[11]
Philippe Fournier-Viger, Antonio Gomariz, Ted Gueniche, Azadeh Soltani, Cheng-Wei Wu, Vincent S Tseng, 2014. Spmf: a java open-source pattern mining library.J. Mach. Learn. Res. 15, 1 (2014), 3389–3393.
[12]
Philippe Fournier-Viger, Cheng-Wei Wu, Antonio Gomariz, and Vincent S Tseng. 2014. VMSP: Efficient vertical mining of maximal sequential patterns. In Canadian conference on artificial intelligence. Springer, 83–94.
[13]
Maria-Elena Froese and Melanie Tory. 2016. Lessons learned from designing visualization dashboards. IEEE computer graphics and applications 36, 2 (2016), 83–89.
[14]
Krzysztof Z. Gajos, Katherine Everitt, Desney S. Tan, Mary Czerwinski, and Daniel S. Weld. 2008. Predictability and Accuracy in Adaptive User Interfaces. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Florence, Italy) (CHI ’08). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1271–1274. https://doi.org/10.1145/1357054.1357252
[15]
Mirta Galesic and Rocio Garcia-Retamero. 2011. Graph literacy: a cross-cultural comparison. Medical Decision Making 31, 3 (2011), 444–457.
[16]
Sukumar Ganapati. 2011. Key features for designing a dashboard. Government Finance Review(2011), 0883–7856.
[17]
Lars Grammel, Melanie Tory, and Margaret-Anne Storey. 2010. How information visualization novices construct visualizations. IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics 16, 6(2010), 943–952.
[18]
Qi Guo and Eugene Agichtein. 2010. Towards predicting web searcher gaze position from mouse movements. In CHI’10 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 3601–3606.
[19]
Sandra G Hart and Lowell E Staveland. 1988. Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of empirical and theoretical research. In Advances in psychology. Vol. 52. Elsevier, 139–183.
[20]
Mary Hegarty. 2018. Advances in cognitive science and information visualization. Score reporting research and applications(2018), 19–34.
[21]
Andrea Janes, Alberto Sillitti, and Giancarlo Succi. 2013. Effective dashboard design. Cutter IT Journal 26, 1 (2013), 17–24.
[22]
Richelle J Koopman, Karl M Kochendorfer, Joi L Moore, David R Mehr, Douglas S Wakefield, Borchuluun Yadamsuren, Jared S Coberly, Robin L Kruse, Bonnie J Wakefield, and Jeffery L Belden. 2011. A diabetes dashboard and physician efficiency and accuracy in accessing data needed for high-quality diabetes care. The Annals of Family Medicine 9, 5 (2011), 398–405.
[23]
Ricardo Matheus, Marijn Janssen, and Devender Maheshwari. 2018. Data science empowering the public: Data-driven dashboards for transparent and accountable decision-making in smart cities. Government Information Quarterly(2018), 101284.
[24]
Saudi MOH. 2020. Saudi COVID-19 Dashboard. Retrieved May 21, 2020 from covid19.moh.gov.sa/
[25]
NHS. 2020. UK COVID-19. Retrieved April 10, 2020 from gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-track-coronavirus-cases
[26]
Yasmina Okan, Mirta Galesic, and Rocio Garcia-Retamero. 2016. How people with low and high graph literacy process health graphs: Evidence from eye-tracking. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 29, 2-3 (2016), 271–294.
[27]
Yasmina Okan, Eva Janssen, Mirta Galesic, and Erika A Waters. 2019. Using the short graph literacy scale to predict precursors of health behavior change. Medical Decision Making 39, 3 (2019), 183–195.
[28]
Yeonjeong Park and Il-Hyun Jo. 2019. Factors that affect the success of learning analytics dashboards. Educational Technology Research and Development 67, 6(2019), 1547–1571.
[29]
The R Project. 2022. RShiny. Retrieved February 15, 2022 from cran.r-project.org/web/packages/shinydashboard
[30]
Alper Sarikaya, Michael Correll, Lyn Bartram, Melanie Tory, and Danyel Fisher. 2018. What do we talk about when we talk about dashboards?IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics 25, 1(2018), 682–692.
[31]
A. Sarikaya, M. Correll, L. Bartram, M. Tory, and D. Fisher. 2019. What Do We Talk About When We Talk About Dashboards?IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 25, 1 (Jan 2019), 682–692. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVCG.2018.2864903
[32]
Harri Siirtola. 2019. The cost of pie charts. In 2019 23rd International Conference Information Visualisation (IV). IEEE, 151–156.
[33]
Arjun Srinivasan, Matthew Brehmer, Bongshin Lee, and Steven M Drucker. 2018. What’s the Difference? Evaluating Variations of Multi-Series Bar Charts for Visual Comparison Tasks. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–12.
[34]
Dragos Strugar. 2019. Complex Systems: On Design and Architecture of Adaptable Dashboards. In International Conference on Objects, Components, Models and Patterns. Springer, 176–186.
[35]
Henri Tokola, Christoph Gröger, Eeva Järvenpää, and Esko Niemi. 2016. Designing manufacturing dashboards on the basis of a Key Performance Indicator survey. Procedia CIRP 57(2016), 619–624.
[36]
Andrea Vázquez-Ingelmo, Francisco José García-Peñalvo, and Roberto Therón. 2019. Tailored information dashboards: A systematic mapping of the literature. In Proceedings of the XX international conference on human computer interaction. 1–8.
[37]
Simon Wakeling, Paul Clough, James Wyper, and Amy Balmain. 2015. Graph literacy and business intelligence: Investigating user understanding of dashboard data visualizations. Business Intelligence Journal 20, 4 (2015), 8–19.
[38]
WHO. 2020. WHO Health Emergency Dashboard. Retrieved April 10, 2020 from who.sprinklr.com/
[39]
Ainhoa Yera, Javier Muguerza, Olatz Arbelaitz, Iñigo Perona, Richard Keers, Darren Ashcroft, Richard Williams, Niels Peek, Caroline Jay, and Markel Vigo. 2018. Inferring Visual Behaviour from User Interaction Data on a Medical Dashboard. In Proceedings of the 2018 International Conference on Digital Health. 55–59.
[40]
Ogan M Yigitbasioglu and Oana Velcu. 2012. A review of dashboards in performance management: Implications for design and research. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 13, 1(2012), 41–59.
[41]
He Yu, Simon Harper, and Markel Vigo. 2021. Modeling micro-interactions in self-regulated learning: A data-driven methodology. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 151 (2021), 102625.
[42]
Juan Diego Zapata-Rivera and Irvin R Katz. 2014. Keeping your audience in mind: Applying audience analysis to the design of interactive score reports. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice 21, 4(2014), 442–463.
Index Terms
- Modeling User Strategies on Interactive Information Dashboards
Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.
Recommendations
Challenges, Strategies and Adaptations on Interactive Dashboards
UMAP '20: Proceedings of the 28th ACM Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation and PersonalizationInteractive dashboards enable viewing and interacting with complex underlying data using visualisations such as charts, tables, maps, or even text typically on a single display. By bringing the most important information in a single place, dashboards ...
Supporting exploratory search tasks with interactive user modeling
ASIST '13: Proceedings of the 76th ASIS&T Annual Meeting: Beyond the Cloud: Rethinking Information BoundariesThis paper presents the design and study of interactive user modeling to support exploratory search tasks. Contrary to traditional interactions, such as query based search, query suggestions, or relevance feedback, interactive user modeling allows a ...
Do city dashboards make sense? Conceptualising user experiences and challenges in using city dashboards. A case study
dg.o '21: Proceedings of the 22nd Annual International Conference on Digital Government ResearchCity dashboards present information about a city to a broad audience with some thought given as to how some of these audiences might understand the information. However, little research has looked at how ’citizens’ make sense of dashboards. Using two ...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
July 2022
360 pages
ISBN:9781450392075
DOI:10.1145/3503252
- General Chairs:
- Alejandro Bellogin,
- Ludovico Boratto,
- Olga C. Santos,
- Program Chairs:
- Liliana Ardissono,
- Bart Knijnenburg
Copyright © 2022 ACM.
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].
Sponsors
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 04 July 2022
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
- Research
- Refereed limited
Conference
UMAP '22: 30th ACM Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation and Personalization
July 4 - 7, 2022
Barcelona, Spain
Acceptance Rates
Overall Acceptance Rate 162 of 633 submissions, 26%
Upcoming Conference
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 263Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)53
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)5
Reflects downloads up to 12 Sep 2024
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
Get Access
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign inFull Access
View options
View or Download as a PDF file.
PDFeReader
View online with eReader.
eReaderHTML Format
View this article in HTML Format.
HTML Format