skip to main content
10.1145/2110192.2110194acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Many roads lead to Rome: mapping users' problem solving strategies

Published:10 April 2010Publication History

ABSTRACT

Especially in ill-defined problems like complex, real-world tasks more than one way leads to a solution. Until now, the evaluation of information visualizations was often restricted to measuring outcomes only (time and error) or insights into the data set. A more detailed look into the processes which lead to or hinder task completion is provided by analyzing users' problem solving strategies. A study illustrates how they can be assessed and how this knowledge can be used in participatory design to improve a visual analytics tool. In order to provide the users a tool which functions as a real scaffold, it should allow them to choose their own path to Rome. We discuss how evaluation of problem solving strategies can shed more light on the users' "exploratory minds".

References

  1. Amar, R., Eagan, J., and Stasko, J. 2005. Low-level components of analytic activity in information visualization. In Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE Symposium on Information Visualization, IEEE CS Press, 2005, 15--21. DOI= http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/INFOVIS.2005.24. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Bertini, E., Perer, A., Plaisant, C., and Santucci, G. 2008. BELIV'08: Beyond time and errors -- novel evaluation methods for information visualization. In Proceedings of BELIV'08. ACM Press, New York, 3913--3916. DOI= http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1358628.1358955. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Card, S. K., Moran, T. P., and Newell, A. 1983. The Psychology of Human-Computer Interaction Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Clark, A. 1997 Being There. Putting Brain, Body, and World Together Again. The MIT Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Friel, S. N., Curcio, F. R., and Bright, G. W. 2001. Making sense of graphs: Critical factors influencing comprehension and instructional implications. J. Res. Math. Educ. 32, 124--158.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Gick, M. L. 1986. Problem-solving strategies. Educ. Psychol., 21, 99--120.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Grant, E. R., and Spivey, M. J. 2003. Eye movements and problem solving: Guiding attention guides thought. Psychol. Sci. 14, 462--466.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Isenberg, P., Zuk, T., Collins, C. and Carpendale, S. 2008. Grounded evaluation of information visualizations. In Proceedings of BELIV'08. ACM Press, New York, 56--63. DOI= http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1377966.1377974. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Jonassen, D. H. 1997. Instructional design models for well-structured and ill-structured problem solving learning. Educ. Tech. Res. 45, 65--94.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Jones, G. 2003. Testing two cognitive theories of insights. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. 29, 1017--1027.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Lammarsch, T., Aigner, W., Bertone, A., Gaertner, J., Mayr, E., Miksch, S., and Smuc, M. 2009. GROOVE: Visually capturing structures of time. In H. C. Hege, I. Hotz, & T. Muntzner (Eds.), EUROGRAPHICS 2009, Vol. 28/3.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Miller, G. A. 1956. The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychol. Rev. 63, 81--97.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Newell, A., Shaw, J. C., and Simon, H. A. 1958. Elements of a theory of human problem solving. Psychol. Rev. 65, 151--166Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Pike, W. A., Stasko, J., Chang, R., and O'Connell, T. A. 2009. The science of interaction. Information Visualization, 8, 263--274. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Pirolli, P. and Card, S. 2005 The sensemaking process and leverage points for analyst technology as identified through cognitive task analysis. Proceedings of International Conference on Intelligence Analysis, 2--4.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Proctor, R. W. and Vu, K. P. 2006. The cognitive revolution at age 50: Has the promise of the human information-processing approach been fulfilled? Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Int. 21, 253--284.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Risku, H., Mayr, E., and Smuc, M. 2009. Situated interaction and cognition in the wild, wild world: Unleashing the power of users as innovators. J. Mobile Multimedia 5, 287--300. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Robertson, G. 2008, Beyond time and errors -- position statement. BELIV 08. http://www.dis.uniroma1.it/~beliv08/pospap/robertson.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Sarayaia, P. B., North, C. and Duca, K. 2005. An insight-based methodology for evaluating bioinformatics visualizations. IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 11, 443--456. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Schraw, G., Dunkle, M. E., and Bendixen, L. D. 1995. Cognitive processes in well-defined and ill-defined problem solving. Appl. Cognitive Psych. 9, 523--538.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Schunn, C. D., McGregor, M. U., and Saner, L. D. 2005. Expertise in ill-defined problem solving domains as effective strategy use. Mem. Cognition 33, 1377--1387.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Shimabukuro, M., Flores, E. F., de Oliveira, M. C. F., Levkowitz, H. 2004. Coordinated views to assist exploration of spatio-temporal data: A case study. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Coordinated and Multiple Views in Exploratory Visualization (CMV04), IEEE CS Press, 107--117. DOI= 10.1109/CMV.2004.1319531. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Simon, H. A. and Newell, A. 1971. Human problem solving: The state of the theory in 1970. Am. Psychol. 26, 145--159.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Smuc, M. in prep. Unveiling the exploratory mind. A cognitive approach to Human-Computer Interaction in visual data analysis. PhD thesis, University of Vienna.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Smuc, M., Mayr, E., Lammarsch, T., Aigner, W., Miksch, S., and Gärtner, J. 2009. To score or not to score? Tripling insights for participatory design. IEEE Comput. Graph. 29(3), 29--38. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Thomas, J. J. and Cook, K. A. 2005 Illuminating the Path: The Research and Development Agenda for Visual Analytics. IEEE Computer SocietyCS Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Valiati, E. R. A., Pimenta, M. S., and Freitas, C. M. D. S. 2006. A taxonomy of tasks for guiding the evaluation of multidimensional visualizations. In Proceedings of BELIV'06. ACM Press, New York, 1--6. DOI= http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1168149.1168169. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Many roads lead to Rome: mapping users' problem solving strategies

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          BELIV '10: Proceedings of the 3rd BELIV'10 Workshop: BEyond time and errors: novel evaLuation methods for Information Visualization
          April 2010
          92 pages
          ISBN:9781450300070
          DOI:10.1145/2110192

          Copyright © 2010 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 ACM 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]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 10 April 2010

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

          Acceptance Rates

          BELIV '10 Paper Acceptance Rate12of18submissions,67%Overall Acceptance Rate45of64submissions,70%

          Upcoming Conference

          CHI '24
          CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
          May 11 - 16, 2024
          Honolulu , HI , USA

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader