skip to main content
10.1145/3614321.3614353acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicegovConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Assessment of public information understanding using plain language and data visualization

Published:20 November 2023Publication History

ABSTRACT

Understanding is an essential quality in the presentation of information, mainly to promote democracy, transparency, and citizen participation in open government data (OGD). Data visualizations are common in open data portals and public services, but there is still a lack of consolidated practices for their publication and evaluations aimed at understanding users. Above all, add the Plain Language technique, which helps to make information more understandable for everyone and reduce barriers to the inclusion of a poorly literate public. This research evaluated the impact of the practices of this language gathered in a usage Guide for creating graphics understandable to the public in relation to other visualizations. The study was carried out with users of public health visualization in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. The results showed that the use of the Guide improved understanding in tasks with fewer variables and data involved. An important insight for the development of dashboards and public portals with visualizations accessible to all. However, with challenges to be overcome mainly in the size and complexity of the various practices to be followed, making it difficult for users to fully use the Guide. Investing in researching a user support system can ensure higher quality graphics.

References

  1. Currie, M. Data as performance–showcasing cities through open data maps. Big Data & Society, SAGE Publications Sage UK: London, England, v. 7, n. 1, p. 2053951720907953, 2020.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Barcellos, R., Bernardini, F., & Viterbo, J. (2022). Towards defining data interpretability in open data portals: Challenges and research opportunities. Information systems, 106, 101961.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Arshad, S., & Khurram, S. (2020). Can government's presence on social media stimulate citizens’ online political participation? Investigating the influence of transparency, trust, and responsiveness. Government Information Quarterly, 37(3), 101486.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Sundberg, L., & Gidlund, K. (2022, October). Dimensions of e-Participation: Levels of Participation and Citizen Configurations. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance (pp. 173-179).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. INAF, B. (Functional Literacy Indicator) Indicador de Alfabetismo Funcional. 2018. https://acaoeducativa.org.br/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Inaf2018_Relat%C3%B3rio-Resultados-Preliminares_v08Ago2018.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Jakobson, R. On linguistic aspects of translation. In: On translation. [S.l.]: Harvard University Press, 2013. p. 232–239.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Plain, A. I. What is plain language? 2023. https://plainlanguagenetwork.org/plain-language/what-is-plain-language/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. GovInfo. Public Law 111 - 274 - Plain Writing Act of 2010. 2010, https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/PLAW-111publ274Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. European Commission, Directorate-General for Translation, Field, Z., How to write clearly, Publications Office, 2016, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2782/022405Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Federal Plain Language Guidelines, March 2011,  Rev. 1, May 2011, https://www.plainlanguage.gov/guidelines/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Vila, R. A., Estevez, E., & Fillottrani, P. R. (2018, April). The design and use of dashboards for driving decision-making in the public sector. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance (pp. 382-388).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Mooney, P., & Juhász, L. (2020). Mapping COVID-19: How web-based maps contribute to the infodemic. Dialogues in Human Geography, 10(2), 265-270.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Eberhardt, A., & Silveira, M. S. (2018, May). Show me the data! A systematic mapping on open government data visualization. In Proceedings of the 19th annual international conference on digital government research: Governance in the data age (pp. 1-10).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Park, S., & Gil-Garcia, J. R. (2017, June). Understanding transparency and accountability in open government ecosystems: The case of health data visualizations in a state government. In Proceedings of the 18th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research (pp. 39-47).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Ansari, B., Barati, M., & Martin, E. G. (2022). Enhancing the usability and usefulness of open government data: A comprehensive review of the state of open government data visualization research. Government Information Quarterly, 39(1), 101657.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Sampaio, I. G. B., Andrade, E. D. O., Bernardini, F., & Viterbo, J. (2022, August). Assessing the Quality of Covid-19 Open Data Portals. In Electronic Government: 21st IFIP WG 8.5 International Conference, EGOV 2022, Linköping, Sweden, September 6–8, 2022, Proceedings (pp. 212-227). Cham: Springer International Publishing.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Ali, M., Alexopoulos, C., & Charalabidis, Y. (2022, October). A comprehensive review of open data platforms, prevalent technologies, and functionalities. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance (pp. 203-214).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. WHO. WHO Coronavirus (COVID-19) Dashboard. 2023, https://covid19.who.int/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. OKBR, Transparency COVID-19. 2022, https://transparenciacovid19.ok.org.br/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. TI, Brazil. Transparency International Brazil. 2022, https://transparenciainternacional.org.br/ranking/ Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Chokki, A. P., Simonofski, A., Frénay, B., & Vanderose, B. (2022). Engaging Citizens with Open Government Data: The Value of Dashboards Compared to Individual Visualizations. Digital Government: Research and Practice, 3(3), 1-20.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Valotto, D. S., Juk, Y., BB Lanza, B., & JT Avila, T. (2021, October). Diagnosis of Brazilian Subnational Government Service Portals. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance (pp. 331-337).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Oliveira, R., Cappelli, C., & Oliveira, J. (2021a, June). An indicator of inefficient visualizations: The challenge of transparency during the covid-19 pandemic in brazil. In XVII Brazilian Symposium on Information Systems (pp. 1-11).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Oliveira, R., Cappelli, C., & Oliveira, J. (2021b, July). Guidelines for Information Visualization Design: Extending Citizen Language. In Proceedings of the IX Workshop on Applied Computing in Electronic Government. Brazil (pp. 259-266). SBC.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Elmqvist, N., & Yi, J. S. (2015). Patterns for visualization evaluation. Information Visualization, 14(3), 250–269. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473871613513228Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Dwyer, T., Lee, B., Fisher, D., Quinn, K. I., Isenberg, P., Robertson, G., & North, C. (2009). A comparison of user-generated and automatic graph layouts. IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics, 15(6), 961-968.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Munzner, T. (2014). Visualization analysis and design. CRC press.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Assessment of public information understanding using plain language and data visualization

    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 Other conferences
      ICEGOV '23: Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance
      September 2023
      509 pages
      ISBN:9798400707421
      DOI:10.1145/3614321

      Copyright © 2023 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 the author(s) 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: 20 November 2023

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed limited

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate350of865submissions,40%
    • Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)20
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2

      Other Metrics

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    HTML Format

    View this article in HTML Format .

    View HTML Format