Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

An evaluation of web-based geovisualizations for different levels of abstraction and realism – what do users predict?


Boér, Alíz; Coltekin, Arzu; Clarke, Keith C (2013). An evaluation of web-based geovisualizations for different levels of abstraction and realism – what do users predict? In: 26th International Cartographic Conference, Dresden, Germany, 25 August 2013 - 30 August 2013, onine.

Abstract

Web-based geovisualizations are produced and served in various levels of abstraction (or realism) such as two-dimensional (2D) cartographic maps, aerial and satellite maps, shaded relief maps, three-dimensional (3D) objects integrated with 2D base maps, and digital globes with fully textured realistic 3D representations. All of these are necessary; but which one is best fitting for which task? When do we need the highest level of realism, and when can or should we use the highest level of abstraction? To contribute to tackling these large questions, we study a subset of non-expert tasks selected from task taxonomies in literature in relation to a subset of existing geovisualizations by means of two online user studies. In an online survey, users (n=106) responded to a list of tasks, where we ask them to predict which of the visualizations they think they would use for this task (thus we measure perceived preference). In a second survey, we give the users (n=245) a set of tasks to solve using one of the provided visualizations, thus we observe which level of abstraction/realism they will actually use and measure actual preference (choice) as well performance. In this paper, we report the results from the first survey.

Abstract

Web-based geovisualizations are produced and served in various levels of abstraction (or realism) such as two-dimensional (2D) cartographic maps, aerial and satellite maps, shaded relief maps, three-dimensional (3D) objects integrated with 2D base maps, and digital globes with fully textured realistic 3D representations. All of these are necessary; but which one is best fitting for which task? When do we need the highest level of realism, and when can or should we use the highest level of abstraction? To contribute to tackling these large questions, we study a subset of non-expert tasks selected from task taxonomies in literature in relation to a subset of existing geovisualizations by means of two online user studies. In an online survey, users (n=106) responded to a list of tasks, where we ask them to predict which of the visualizations they think they would use for this task (thus we measure perceived preference). In a second survey, we give the users (n=245) a set of tasks to solve using one of the provided visualizations, thus we observe which level of abstraction/realism they will actually use and measure actual preference (choice) as well performance. In this paper, we report the results from the first survey.

Statistics

Altmetrics

Downloads

395 downloads since deposited on 10 Jan 2014
13 downloads since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Conference or Workshop Item (Paper), not refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:07 Faculty of Science > Institute of Geography
Dewey Decimal Classification:910 Geography & travel
Language:English
Event End Date:30 August 2013
Deposited On:10 Jan 2014 09:41
Last Modified:06 Apr 2017 15:40
ISBN:978-1-907075-06-3
Official URL:http://www.icc2013.org/_contxt/_medien/_upload/_proceeding/284_proceeding.pdf
Related URLs:http://icaci.org/files/documents/ICC_proceedings/ICC2013/ICC2013_Proceedings.pdf

Download

Preview Icon on Download
Preview
Content: Published Version
Filetype: PDF
Size: 550kB

TrendTerms

TrendTerms displays relevant terms of the abstract of this publication and related documents on a map. The terms and their relations were extracted from ZORA using word statistics. Their timelines are taken from ZORA as well. The bubble size of a term is proportional to the number of documents where the term occurs. Red, orange, yellow and green colors are used for terms that occur in the current document; red indicates high interlinkedness of a term with other terms, orange, yellow and green decreasing interlinkedness. Blue is used for terms that have a relation with the terms in this document, but occur in other documents.
You can navigate and zoom the map. Mouse-hovering a term displays its timeline, clicking it yields the associated documents.

Author Collaborations