Abstract
This paper reports on the competitive analysis of water level visualization tools that support adaptive management in response to global climate change. A competitive analysis study is a theory-based usability engineering method administered to critically compare a suite of related applications according to their relative merits, to the end of revealing best practices and unmet opportunities. The competitive analysis was conducted to inform design and development of the U.S. National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Lake Level Viewer, a map-based visualization tool supporting adaptive coastal management of hazards related to future water level change across the Great Lakes (USA). Twenty-five (n = 25) water level visualization tools were compared across two broad themes in cartography: (1) representation, or the graphic encoding of information in the map display, and (2) interaction, or the means by which the user is able to manipulate the map display. The competitive analysis of water level visualization tools serves as a case study that can be extended to other mapping and visualization contexts.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Agumya A, Hunter GJ (2002) Responding to the consequences of uncertainty in geographical data. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 16(5):405–417
Angel J, Kunkel K (2010) The response of Great Lakes water levels to future climate scenarios with an emphasis on Lake Michigan–Huron. J Great Lakes Res 36(Suppl 2):51–58
Bertin J (1967–1983) Semiology of graphics: diagrams, networks, maps. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison
Harrower MA (2002) Visual benchmarks: representing geographic change with map animation. Penn State, University Park
Hayhoe K, VanDorn J, Croley T, Schlegal N, Wuebbles D (2010) Regional climate change projections for Chicago and the US Great Lakes. J Great Lakes Res 36:7–21
IPCC (International Panel on Climate Change) (2007) IPCC Fourth Assessment Report: Climate Change 2007. http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_and_data_reports.shtml#1
Kostelnick JC, McDermott D, Rowley RJ (2009) Cartographic methods for visualizing sea level rise. In: International cartographic conference, Santiago
Longley PA, Goodchild MF, Maguire DJ, Rhind DW (2005) Geographic information systems and science. Wiley, West Sussex
MacEachren AM (1994) Visualization in modern cartography: setting the agenda. In: MacEachren AM, Taylor DRF (eds) Visualization in modern cartography. Pergamon, Oxford, pp 1–12
MacEachren AM (1995) How maps work. The Guilford Press, New York
MacEachren AM, Robinson A, Hopper S, Gardner S, Murray R, Gahegan M, Hetzler E (2005) Visualizing geospatial information uncertainty: what we know and what we need to know. Cartogr Geogr Inf Sci 32(3):139–160
MacEachren AM, Roth RE, O'Brien J, Li B, Swingley D, Gahegan M (2012) Visual semiotics & uncertainty visualization: an empirical study. IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph 18(12):2496–2505
Muehlenhaus I (2013) Web cartography: map design for interactive and mobile devices. CRC, Boca Raton
Nielsen J (1992) The usability engineering life cycle. Computer 25(3):12–22
Peterson MP (ed) (2003) Maps and the Internet. Elsevier, Amsterdam
Robinson AC, Chen J, Lengerich EJ, Meyer HG, MacEachren AM (2005) Combining usability techniques to design geovisualization tools for epidemiology. Cartogr Geogr Inf Sci 32(4):243–255
Roth RE (2009) A qualitative approach to understanding the role of geographic information uncertainty during decision making. Cartogr Geogr Inf Sci 36(4):315–330
Roth RE (2011) A comparison of methods for evaluating cartographic interfaces. In: International cartographic conference, Paris, 5 July 2011
Roth RE (2012) Cartographic interaction primitives: framework and synthesis. Cartogr J 49(4):376–395
Roth RE (2013a) An empirically-derived taxonomy of interaction primitives for interactive cartography and geovisualization. Trans Vis Comput Graph 19(12):2356–2365
Roth RE (2013b) Interactive maps: what we know and what we need to know. J Spatial Inf Sci 6(59–115)
Roth RE, RG Donohue, CM Sack, T Wallace, T Buckingham (2014) Keeping pace with evolving open source web mapping technologies. Cartogr Perspect (in press)
Shneiderman B (1996) The eyes have it: a task by data type taxonomy for information visualization. In: IEEE conference on visual languages, Boulder. IEEE Computer Society Press, pp 336–343
Slocum TA, McMaster RB, Kessler FC, Howard HH (2009) Thematic cartography and geographic visualization, 3rd edn. Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River
Tufte E (1983) The visual display of quantitative information, 2nd edn. Graphics Press LLC, Cheshire
Whitefield A, Escgate A, Denley I, Byerley P (1993) On distinguishing work tasks and enabling tasks. Interact Comput 5(3):333–347
Acknowledgments
The research was supported by the U.S. National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration through Award #167152.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Roth, R.E., Quinn, C., Hart, D. (2015). The Competitive Analysis Method for Evaluating Water Level Visualization Tools. In: Brus, J., Vondrakova, A., Vozenilek, V. (eds) Modern Trends in Cartography. Lecture Notes in Geoinformation and Cartography. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07926-4_19
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07926-4_19
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-07925-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-07926-4
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)