Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Immersive Analytics: Time to Reconsider the Value of 3D for Information Visualisation

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Immersive Analytics

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 11190))

Abstract

Modern virtual reality display technologies engender spatial immersion by using a variety of depth cues such as perspective and head-tracked binocular presentation to create visually realistic 3D worlds. While 3D visualisations are common in scientific visualisation, they are much less common in information visualisation. In this chapter we explore whether immersive analytic applications should continue to use traditional 2D information visualisations or whether there are situations when 3D may offer benefits. We identify a number of potential applications of 3D depth cues for abstract data visualisation: using depth to show an additional data dimension, such as in 2.5D network layouts, views on non-flat surfaces and egocentric views in which the data is placed around the viewer, and visualising abstract data with a spatial embedding. Another important potential benefit is the ability to arrange multiple views in the 3D space around the user and to attach abstract visualisations to objects in the real world.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alper, B., Hollerer, T., Kuchera-Morin, J., Forbes, A.: Stereoscopic highlighting: 2D graph visualization on stereo displays. IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 17(12), 2325–2333 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Andrews, C., Endert, A., North, C.: Space to think: large high-resolution displays for sensemaking. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 55–64. ACM (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bach, B., Pietriga, E., Fekete, J.D.: Visualizing dynamic networks with matrix cubes. In: The SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 877–886 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bach, B., Dragicevic, P., Archambault, D., Hurter, C., Carpendale, S.: A review of temporal data visualizations based on space-time cube operations. In: Eurographics Conference on Visualization (EuroVis) (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Belcher, D., Billinghurst, M., Hayes, S., Stiles, R.: Using augmented reality for visualizing complex graphs in three dimensions. In: Proceedings of the 2nd IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality, p. 84. IEEE Computer Society (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Billinghurst, M., Kato, H., Poupyrev, I.: The magicbook: a transitional ar interface. Comput. Graph. 25(5), 745–753 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bowman, D.A., North, C., Chen, J., Polys, N.F., Pyla, P.S., Yilmaz, U.: Information-rich virtual environments: theory, tools, and research agenda. In: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology, pp. 81–90. ACM (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Brandes, U., Dwyer, T., Schreiber, F.: Visual understanding of metabolic pathways across organisms using layout in two and a half dimensions. J. Integr. Bioinform. 1(1), 11–26 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Brath, R.: 3D infovis is here to stay: deal with it. In: 2014 IEEE VIS International Workshop on 3DVis, pp. 25–31 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Brath, R., MacMurchy, P.: Sphere-based information visualization: challenges and benefits. In: IV, pp. 1–6 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Butscher, S., Hubenschmid, S., Müller, J., Fuchs, J., Reiterer, H.: Clusters, trends, and outliers: how immersive technologies can facilitate the collaborative analysis of multidimensional data. In: Proceedings SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 90:1–90:12 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Carlbom, I., Paciorek, J.: Planar geometric projections and viewing transformations. ACM Comput. Surv. (CSUR) 10(4), 465–502 (1978)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Chen, J., Pyla, P.S., Bowman, D.A.: Testbed evaluation of navigation and text display techniques in an information-rich virtual environment. In: IEEE Proceedings of Virtual Reality, pp. 181–289. IEEE (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Chen, W., et al.: A novel interface for interactive exploration of DTI fibers. IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 15(6), 1433–1440 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Cockburn, A.: Revisiting 2D vs 3D implications on spatial memory. In: Proceedings of the Fifth Conference on Australasian User Interface-Volume 28, pp. 25–31. Australian Computer Society, Inc. (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Cockburn, A., McKenzie, B.: An evaluation of cone trees. In: McDonald, S., Waern, Y., Cockton, G. (eds.) People and Computers XIV – Usability or Else!, pp. 425–436. Springer, London (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-0515-2_28

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  17. Cockburn, A., McKenzie, B.: 3D or not 3D?: evaluating the effect of the third dimension in a document management system. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 434–441. ACM (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Cockburn, A., McKenzie, B.: Evaluating the effectiveness of spatial memory in 2D and 3D physical and virtual environments. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 203–210. ACM (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Cockburn, A., McKenzie, B.: Evaluating spatial memory in two and three dimensions. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 61(3), 359–373 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Collins, C., Carpendale, S.: VisLink: revealing relationships amongst visualizations. IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 13(6), 1192–1199 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Cordeil, M., Cunningham, A., Dwyer, T., Thomas, B.H., Marriott, K.: ImAxes: immersive axes as embodied affordances for interactive multivariate data visualisation. In: Proceedings of the 30th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, pp. 71–83. ACM (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Cruz-Neira, C., Sandin, D.J., DeFanti, T.A., Kenyon, R.V., Hart, J.C.: The CAVE: audio visual experience automatic virtual environment. Commun. ACM 35(6), 64–72 (1992)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Cutting, J.E.: Rigidity in cinema seen from the front row, side aisle. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 13(3), 323–334 (1987)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Cutting, J.E., Vishton, P.M.: Perceiving layout and knowing distances: the integration, relative potency, and contextual use of different information about depth. In: Perception of Space and Motion, pp. 69–117. Elsevier (1995)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  25. Dodgson, N.A.: Autostereoscopic 3D displays. Computer 38(8), 31–36 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Dübel, S., Röhlig, M., Schumann, H., Trapp, M.: 2D and 3D presentation of spatial data: a systematic review. In: IEEE VIS International Workshop on 3DVis, pp. 11–18. IEEE (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Duwaer, A., Van Den Brink, G.: What is the diplopia threshold? Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 29(4), 295–309 (1981)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Dwyer, T., Eades, P.: Visualising a fund manager flow graph with columns and worms. In: Proceedings Sixth International Conference on Information Visualisation, pp. 147–152. IEEE (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Eades, P., Feng, Q.-W.: Multilevel visualization of clustered graphs. In: North, S. (ed.) GD 1996. LNCS, vol. 1190, pp. 101–112. Springer, Heidelberg (1997). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-62495-3_41

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  30. Elmqvist, N., Dragicevic, P., Fekete, J.D.: Rolling the dice: multidimensional visual exploration using scatterplot matrix navigation. IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 14(6), 1539–1148 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Elmqvist, N., Tsigas, P.: A taxonomy of 3D occlusion management for visualization. IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 14(5), 1095–1109 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. ElSayed, N.A., Smith, R.T., Marriott, K., Thomas, B.H.: Context-aware design pattern for situated analytics: blended model view controller. J. Vis. Lang. Comput. 44, 1–12 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Englund, R., Ropinski, T.: Evaluating the perception of semi-transparent structures in direct volume rendering techniques. In: SIGGRAPH ASIA 2016 Symposium on Visualization, pp. 9:1–9:8. ACM (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Ens, B., Hincapié-Ramos, J.D., Irani, P.: Ethereal planes: a design framework for 2D information space in 3D mixed reality environments. In: Proceedings of the 2nd ACM Symposium on Spatial User Interaction, pp. 2–12. ACM (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Ens, B.M., Finnegan, R., Irani, P.P.: The personal cockpit: a spatial interface for effective task switching on head-worn displays. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 3171–3180. ACM (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Favalora, G.E.: Volumetric 3D displays and application infrastructure. Computer 38(8), 37–44 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Feiner, S., MacIntyre, B., Haupt, M., Solomon, E.: Windows on the world: 2D windows for 3D augmented reality. In: Proceedings of the 6th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, pp. 145–155. ACM (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Fincham, E., Walton, J.: The reciprocal actions of accommodation and convergence. J. Physiol. 137(3), 488–508 (1957)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Gracia, A., González, S., Robles, V., Menasalvas, E., von Landesberger, T.: New insights into the suitability of the third dimension for visualizing multivariate/multidimensional data: a study based on loss of quality quantification. Inf. Vis. 15(1), 3–30 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Greffard, N., Picarougne, F., Kuntz, P.: Visual community detection: an evaluation of 2D, 3D perspective and 3D stereoscopic displays. In: van Kreveld, M., Speckmann, B. (eds.) GD 2011. LNCS, vol. 7034, pp. 215–225. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-25878-7_21

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  41. Grossman, T., Wigdor, D., Balakrishnan, R.: Exploring and reducing the effects of orientation on text readability in volumetric displays. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 483–492. ACM (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  42. Hägerstrand, T.: What about people in regional science? Reg. Sci. Assoc. 24(1), 7–24 (1970)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Hancock, M., ten Cate, T., Carpendale, S., Isenberg, T.: Supporting sandtray therapy on an interactive tabletop. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI 2010, pp. 2133–2142. ACM (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  44. Hancock, M., Nacenta, M., Gutwin, C., Carpendale, S.: The effects of changing projection geometry on the interpretation of 3D orientation on tabletops. In: Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Interactive Tabletops and Surfaces, pp. 157–164. ACM (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  45. Haskell, I.D., Wickens, C.D.: Two-and three-dimensional displays for aviation: a theoretical and empirical comparison. Int. J. Aviat. Psychol. 3(2), 87–109 (1993)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Held, R., Cooper, E., Banks, M.: Blur and disparity are complementary cues to depth. Curr. Biol. 22(5), 426–431 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Hess, R.F., To, L., Zhou, J., Wang, G., Cooperstock, J.R.: Stereo vision: the haves and have-nots. i-Perception 6(3), 2041669515593028 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Hoffman, D.M., Girshick, A.R., Akeley, K., Banks, M.S.: Vergence-accommodation conflicts hinder visual performance and cause visual fatigue. J. Vis. 8(3), 33–33 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Holografika Inc.: Holografika website. http://www.holografika.com. Accessed 17 Oct 2017

  50. Irani, P., Ware, C.: Diagramming information structures using 3D perceptual primitives. ACM Trans. Comput. Hum. Interact. (TOCHI) 10(1), 1–19 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Isenberg, P., Isenberg, T., Hesselmann, T., Lee, B., von Zadow, U., Tang, A.: Data visualization on interactive surfaces: a research agenda. IEEE Comput. Graph. Appl. 33(2), 16–24 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Jansen, Y., et al.: Opportunities and challenges for data physicalization. In: Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI 2015, pp. 3227–3236. ACM (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  53. Jianu, R., Demiralp, C., Laidlaw, D.: Exploring 3D DTI fiber tracts with linked 2D representations. IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 15(6), 1449–1456 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Kerren, A., Schreiber, F.: Why integrate InfoVis and SciVis?: an example from systems biology. IEEE Comput. Graph. Appl. 34, 69–73 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Khan, J., Can, C., Greenaway, A., Underwood, I.: A real-space interactive holographic display based on a large-aperture HOE. In: Proceeding of SPIE, vol. 8644, p. 86440M (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  56. Kim, M., Lee, J., Stuerzlinger, W., Wohn, K.: Holostation: augmented visualization and presentation. In: SIGGRAPH Asia 2016 Symposium on Visualization, pp. 12:1–12:9. ACM (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  57. Kiyokawa, K., Kurata, Y., Ohno, H.: An optical see-through display for mutual occlusion with a real-time stereovision system. Comput. Graph. 25(5), 765–779 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Kjellin, A., Pettersson, L.W., Seipel, S., Lind, M.: Different levels of 3D: an evaluation of visualized discrete spatiotemporal data in space-time cubes. Inf. Vis. 9(2), 152–164 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Kjellin, A., Pettersson, L.W., Seipel, S., Lind, M.: Evaluating 2D and 3D visualizations of spatiotemporal information. ACM Trans. Appl. Percept. (TAP) 7(3), 19:1–19:23 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  60. Kwon, O.H., Muelder, C., Lee, K., Ma, K.L.: A study of layout, rendering, and interaction methods for immersive graph visualization. IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 22(7), 1802–1815 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Kwon, O.H., Muelder, C., Lee, K., Ma, K.L.: Spherical layout and rendering methods for immersive graph visualization. In: 2015 IEEE Pacific Visualization Symposium (PacificVis), pp. 63–67 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  62. Larson, K., van Dantzich, M., Czerwinski, M., Robertson, G.: Text in 3D: some legibility results. In: CHI 2000 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 145–146. ACM (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  63. Lee, J.M., MacLachlan, J., Wallace, W.A.: The effects of 3D imagery on managerial data interpretation. MIS Q. 10, 257–269 (1986)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Lopez-Hernandez, R., Guilmaine, D., McGuffin, M.J., Barford, L.: A layer-oriented interface for visualizing time-series data from oscilloscopes. In: IEEE Pacific Visualization Symposium (PacificVis), pp. 41–48. IEEE (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  65. Mackinlay, J.D., Robertson, G.G., Card, S.K.: The perspective wall: detail and context smoothly integrated. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 173–176. ACM (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  66. Mauderer, M., Conte, S., Nacenta, M.A., Vishwanath, D.: Depth perception with gaze-contingent depth of field. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 217–226. ACM (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  67. Mauderer, M., Nacenta, M.A., Morrison, D.: Gazer: application for gaze-contingent viewing of images, April 2018. https://github.com/MichaelMauderer/Gazer. Accessed 16 June 2015. T12:05:34Z

  68. McIntire, J.P., Liggett, K.K.: The (possible) utility of stereoscopic 3D displays for information visualization: the good, the bad, and the ugly. In: IEEE VIS International Workshop on 3DVis, pp. 1–9 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  69. McIntire, J.P., Havig, P.R., Geiselman, E.E.: Stereoscopic 3D displays and human performance: a comprehensive review. Displays 35(1), 18–26 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Milgram, P., Takemura, H., Utsumi, A., Kishino, F.: Augmented reality: a class of displays on the reality-virtuality continuum. In: Proceedings SPIE, vol. 2351, pp.–292 (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  71. Munzner, T.: Visualization Analysis and Design. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2014)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  72. Nacenta, M.A., Hancock, M., Gutwin, C., Carpendale, S.: The effects of changing projection geometry on perception of 3D objects on and around tabletops. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact. (TOCHI) 23(2), 11:1–11:54 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  73. Nacenta, M.A., et al.: E-conic: a perspective-aware interface for multi-display environments. In: Proceedings of the 20th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, pp. 279–288. ACM (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  74. Nelson, L., Cook, D., Cruz-Neira, C.: XGobi vs the C2: results of an experiment comparing data visualization in a 3-D immersive virtual reality environment with a 2-D workstation display. Comput. Stat. 14(1), 39–52 (1999)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  75. Ragan, E.D., Kopper, R., Schuchardt, P., Bowman, D.A.: Studying the effects of stereo, head tracking, and field of regard on a small-scale spatial judgment task. IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 19(5), 886–896 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Rekimoto, J., Green, M.: The information cube: Using transparency in 3D information visualization. In: Proceedings of the Third Annual Workshop on Information Technologies & Systems (WITS 1993), pp. 125–132 (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  77. Robertson, G., Czerwinski, M., Larson, K., Robbins, D.C., Thiel, D., Van Dantzich, M.: Data mountain: using spatial memory for document management. In: Proceedings of the 11th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, pp. 153–162. ACM (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  78. Robertson, G.G., Mackinlay, J.D., Card, S.K.: Cone trees: animated 3D visualizations of hierarchical information. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 189–194. ACM (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  79. Rogers, B., Graham, M.: Motion parallax as an independent cue for depth perception. Perception 8(2), 125–134 (1979)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Schonlau, M., Peters, E.: Graph comprehension: an experiment in displaying data as bar charts, pie charts and tables with and without the gratuitous 3rd dimension. Social Science Research Network Working Paper Series, pp. 1–16 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  81. Schowengerdt, B.T., Seibel, E.J.: True three-dimensional displays that allow viewers to dynamically shift accommodation, bringing objects displayed at different viewing distances into and out of focus. CyberPsychology Behav. 7(6), 610–620 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Sedlmair, M., Munzner, T., Tory, M.: Empirical guidance on scatterplot and dimension reduction technique choices. IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 19(12), 2634–2643 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Spence, R.: Information Visualization. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  84. St. John, M., Cowen, M.B., Smallman, H.S., Oonk, H.M.: The use of 2D and 3D displays for shape-understanding versus relative-position tasks. Hum. Factors J. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. 43(1), 79–98 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. St. John, M., Smallman, H.S., Bank, T.E., Cowen, M.B.: Tactical routing using two-dimensional and three-dimensional views of terrain. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, vol. 45, pp. 1409–1413. SAGE Publications (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  86. Sun, H.J., Chan, G.S.W., Campos, J.L.: Active navigation and orientation-free spatial representations. Mem. Cogn. 32(1), 51–71 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Tait, A.: Desktop virtual reality. In: IEE Colloquium on Using Virtual Worlds, pp. 5/1–5/5 (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  88. Todd, J.T., Norman, J.F.: The visual perception of 3-D shape from multiple cues: are observers capable of perceiving metric structure? Percept. Psychophys. 65(1), 31–47 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. Todd, J.T., Oomes, A.H., Koenderink, J.J., Kappers, A.M.: On the affine structure of perceptual space. Psychol. Sci. 12(3), 191–196 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  90. Tomilin, M.G.: Head-mounted displays. J. Opt. Technol. 66, 528–533 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  91. Tory, M., Kirkpatrick, A.E., Atkins, M.S., Möller, T.: Visualization task performance with 2D, 3D, and combination displays. IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 12(1), 2–13 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  92. Tory, M., Moller, T., Atkins, M.S., Kirkpatrick, A.E.: Combining 2D and 3D views for orientation and relative position tasks. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 73–80. ACM (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  93. Tory, M., Sprague, D.W., Wu, F., So, W.Y., Munzner, T.: Spatialization design: comparing points and landscapes. IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 13(6), 1262–1269 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  94. Tory, M., Swindells, C., Dreezer, R.: Comparing dot and landscape spatializations for visual memory differences. IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 15(6), 1033–1040 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  95. Van Orden, K., Broyles, J.: Visuospatial task performance as a function of two-and three-dimensional display presentation techniques. Displays 21(1), 17–24 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  96. Van Schooten, B.W., Van Dijk, E.M., Zudilova-Seinstra, E., Suinesiaputra, A., Reiber, J.H.: The effect of stereoscopy and motion cues on 3D interpretation task performance. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces, pp. 167–170. ACM (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  97. Vishwanath, D., Blaser, E.: Retinal blur and the perception of egocentric distance. J. Vis. 10(10), 26 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  98. Vishwanath, D.: Toward a new theory of stereopsis. Psychol. Rev. 121(2), 151–178 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  99. Vishwanath, D., Hibbard, P.B.: Seeing in 3D with just one eye: stereopsis without binocular vision. Psychol. Sci. 24(9), 1673–1685 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  100. Ware, C., Franck, G.: Viewing a graph in a virtual reality display is three times as good as a 2D diagram. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages, pp. 182–183 (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  101. Ware, C.: Designing with a 2 1/2-D attitude. Inf. Des. J. 10(3), 258–258 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  102. Ware, C.: Visual Thinking: for Design. Morgan Kaufmann, Burlington (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  103. Ware, C.: Information Visualization: Perception for Design, 3rd edn. Elsevier, New York (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  104. Ware, C., Arthur, K., Booth, K.S.: Fish tank virtual reality. In: Proceedings of the INTERACT and CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI 1993, pp. 37–42. ACM (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  105. Ware, C., Mitchell, P.: Reevaluating stereo and motion cues for visualizing graphs in three dimensions. In: Proceedings of the 2nd Symposium on Applied Perception in Graphics and Visualization, pp. 51–58. ACM (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  106. Wegman, E.J., Symanzik, J.: Immersive projection technology for visual data mining. J. Comput. Graph. Stat. 11(1), 163–188 (2002)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  107. Westerman, S.J., Cribbin, T.: Mapping semantic information in virtual space: dimensions, variance and individual differences. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 53(5), 765–787 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  108. Wickens, C.D., Merwin, D.H., Lin, E.L.: Implications of graphics enhancements for the visualization of scientific data: dimensional integrality, stereopsis, motion, and mesh. Hum. Factors J. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. 36(1), 44–61 (1994)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  109. Yang, Y., Jenny, B., Dwyer, T., Marriott, K., Chen, H., Cordeil, M.: Maps and globes in virtual reality. Comput. Graph. Forum (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  110. Zaroff, C.M., Knutelska, M., Frumkes, T.E.: Variation in stereoacuity: normative description, fixation disparity, and the roles of aging and gender. Investig. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 44(2), 891–900 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  111. Zhang, G., Kochunov, P., Hong, E., Carr, H., Chen, J.: Towards visual mega-analysis of voxel-based measurement in brain cohorts. In: Proceedings of the Eurographics/IEEE VGTC Conference on Visualization: Short Papers, pp. 55–59. Eurographics Association (2016)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Monash University, Melbourne, Australia

    Kim Marriott

  2. The Ohio State University, Columbus, USA

    Jian Chen

  3. University of Stuttgart (VISUS), Stuttgart, Germany

    Marcel Hlawatsch & Guido Reina

  4. Ochanomizu University, Tokyo, Japan

    Takayuki Itoh

  5. University of St Andrews, St Andrews, Scotland

    Miguel A. Nacenta

  6. Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada

    Wolfgang Stuerzlinger

Authors
  1. Kim Marriott
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jian Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Marcel Hlawatsch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Takayuki Itoh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Miguel A. Nacenta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Guido Reina
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Wolfgang Stuerzlinger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kim Marriott .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

    Kim Marriott

  2. University of Konstanz, Konstanz, Germany

    Falk Schreiber

  3. Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

    Tim Dwyer

  4. University of Konstanz, Konstanz, Germany

    Karsten Klein

  5. Microsoft , Redmond, WA, USA

    Nathalie Henry Riche

  6. Ochanomizu University, Tokyo, Japan

    Takayuki Itoh

  7. Simon Fraser University, Surrey, BC, Canada

    Wolfgang Stuerzlinger

  8. University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA, Australia

    Bruce H. Thomas

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Marriott, K. et al. (2018). Immersive Analytics: Time to Reconsider the Value of 3D for Information Visualisation. In: Marriott, K., et al. Immersive Analytics. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11190. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01388-2_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01388-2_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-01387-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-01388-2

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation