The Community for Technology Leaders
RSS Icon
Subscribe
Issue No.12 - Dec. (2012 vol.18)
pp: 2613-2620
Justin Talbot , Stanford University
John Gerth , Stanford University
Pat Hanrahan , Stanford University
ABSTRACT
Comparing slopes is a fundamental graph reading task and the aspect ratio chosen for a plot influences how easy these comparisons are to make. According to Banking to 45°, a classic design guideline first proposed and studied by Cleveland et al., aspect ratios that center slopes around 45° minimize errors in visual judgments of slope ratios. This paper revisits this earlier work. Through exploratory pilot studies that expand Cleveland et al.’s experimental design, we develop an empirical model of slope ratio estimation that fits more extreme slope ratio judgments and two common slope ratio estimation strategies. We then run two experiments to validate our model. In the first, we show that our model fits more generally than the one proposed by Cleveland et al. and we find that, in general, slope ratio errors are not minimized around 45°. In the second experiment, we explore a novel hypothesis raised by our model: that visible baselines can substantially mitigate errors made in slope judgments. We conclude with an application of our model to aspect ratio selection.
INDEX TERMS
Approximation methods, Estimation, Market research, Predictive models, Data models, Slope analysis, aspect ratio selection, Banking to 45 degrees, slope perception, orientation resolution
CITATION
Justin Talbot, John Gerth, Pat Hanrahan, "An Empirical Model of Slope Ratio Comparisons", IEEE Transactions on Visualization & Computer Graphics, vol.18, no. 12, pp. 2613-2620, Dec. 2012, doi:10.1109/TVCG.2012.196
REFERENCES
[1] V. Beattie and M. J. Jones., The impact of graph slope on rate of change judgments in corporate reports Abacus, 38(2): 177-199, 2002.
[2] L. A. Best., Visual extrapolation of linear and nonlinear trends: Does the knowledge of underlying trend type affect accuracy and response bias? In T. Sobh, editor, , Advances in Computer and Information Sciences and Enuineerine, pages 273-278. Springer Netherlands. 2008.
[3] W. S. Cleveland., A model for studying display methods of statistical graphics Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics, 2(4): 323343. 1993.
[4] W. S. Cleveland,M. E. McGill,, and R. McGill., The shape parameter of a two-variable graph Journal of the American Statistical Association, 83(402): 289-300. 1988.
[5] W. S. Cleveland and R. McGill., Graphical perception: The visual decoding of quantitative information on graphical displays of data Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A (General). 150(3): 192-229. 1987.
[6] M. Correll, D. Albers, S. Franconeri,, and M. Gleicher., Comparing aver-ages in time series data. In Proceedings of the 2012 ACM annual conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI ’12, pages 10951104, New York, NY, USA, 2012. ACM.
[7] C. Fermller and H. Malm, Uncertainty in visual processes predicts geo-metrical optical illusions Vision Research, 44(7): 727-749, 2004.
[8] S. Few. Time on the horizon. http://www.perceptualedge.com/articles/visual_business_intelligence time_ on_the_horizon.pdf, June/July 2008.
[9] G. H. Fisher., An experimental study of linear inclination Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 26(1): 52-62. 1974.
[10] J. Heer and M. Agrawala, Multi-scale banking to 45 degrees IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 12: 701-708, 2006.
[11] J. Heer, N. Kong, and M. Agrawala., Sizing the horizon: the effects of chart size and layering on the graphical perception of time series visual-izations. In Proceedings of the 27th international conference on Human factors in computing systems, CHI ’09, pages 1303-1312, New York, NY, USA. 2009. ACM.
[12] C. Q. Howe and D. Purves., Natural-scene geometry predicts the perception of angles and line orientation Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(4): 1228-1233, 2005.
[13] G. J. Kennedy,H. S. Orbach,, and G. Loffler., Effects of global shape on angle discrimination Vision Research. 46(8-9): 1530-1539. 2006.
[14] S. Nundy, B. Lotto, D. Coppola., A. Shimpi, and D. Purves., Why are angles misperceived? Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 97(10): 5592-5597. 2000.
[15] J. Talbot, J. Gerth, and P. Hanrahan, Arc length-based aspect ratio selection IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 17(12): 2276-2282, Dec. 2011.
17 ms
(Ver 2.0)

Marketing Automation Platform Marketing Automation Tool