Evaluating Perceptual Judgements on 3D Printed Bar Charts
Volume 22, Issue 2 (2024): Special Issue: 2023 Symposium on Data Science and Statistics (SDSS): “Inquire, Investigate, Implement, Innovate”, pp. 176–190
Pub. online: 24 May 2024
Type: Data Science In Action
Open Access
Received
1 August 2023
1 August 2023
Accepted
7 April 2024
7 April 2024
Published
24 May 2024
24 May 2024
Abstract
Graphical design principles typically recommend minimizing the dimensionality of a visualization - for instance, using only 2 dimensions for bar charts rather than providing a 3D rendering, because this extra complexity may result in a decrease in accuracy. This advice has been oft repeated, but the underlying experimental evidence is focused on fixed 2D projections of 3D charts. In this paper, we describe an experiment which attempts to establish whether the decrease in accuracy extends to 3D virtual renderings and 3D printed charts. We replicate the grouped bar chart comparisons in the 1984 Cleveland & McGill study, assessing the accuracy of numerical estimates using different types of 3D and 2D renderings.
Supplementary material
Supplementary MaterialStimuli, code, and data for this experiment are provided at https://github.com/TWiedRW/2023-JDS-3dcharts.
References
Barfield W, Robless R (1989). The effects of two- or three-dimensional graphics on the problem-solving performance of experienced and novice decision makers. Behaviour & Information Technology, 8(5): 369–385. https://doi.org/10.1080/01449298908914567
Cleveland WS, McGill R (1984). Graphical perception: Theory, experimentation, and application to the development of graphical methods. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 79(387): 531–554. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1984.10478080
Croxton FE, Stein H (1932). Graphic comparisons by bars, squares, circles, and cubes. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 27(177): 54–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1932.10503227
Croxton FE, Stryker RE (1927). Bar charts versus circle diagrams. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 22(160): 473–482. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1927.10502976
Eells WC (1926). The relative merits of circles and bars for representing component parts. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 21(154): 119–132. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1926.10502165
Fisher SH, Dempsey JV, Marousky RT (1997). Data visualization: Preference and use of two-dimensional and three-dimensional graphs. Social Science Computer Review, 15(3): 256–263. https://doi.org/10.1177/089443939701500303
Fleet C (2023). How tactile graphics can help end image poverty. MIT Technology Review. https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/06/15/1074036/ending-image-poverty/
Hollands JG, Dyre BP (2000). Bias in proportion judgments: The cyclical power model. Psychological Review, 107(3): 500–524. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.107.3.500
Hullman J, Qiao X, Correll M, Kale A, Kay M (2019). In pursuit of error: A survey of uncertainty visualization evaluation. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 25(1): 903–913. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVCG.2018.2864889
Murdoch D, Adler D (2023). rgl: 3D Visualization Using OpenGL. https://github.com/dmurdoch/rgl, https://dmurdoch.github.io/rgl/.
Vanderplas S, Cook D, Hofmann H (2020). Testing statistical charts: What makes a good graph? Annual Review of Statistics and Its Application, 7(1): 61–88. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-statistics-031219-041252
Wood SN (2003). Thin-plate regression splines. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society (B), 65(1): 95–114. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9868.00374
Wood SN (2004). Stable and efficient multiple smoothing parameter estimation for generalized additive models. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 99(467): 673–686. https://doi.org/10.1198/016214504000000980