The Community for Technology Leaders
RSS Icon
Issue No.12 - Dec. (2011 vol.17)
pp: 2440-2448
Michael Burch , VISUS, University of Stuttgart
Natalia Konevtsova , VISUS, University of Stuttgart
Julian Heinrich , VISUS, University of Stuttgart
Markus Hoeferlin , VISUS, University of Stuttgart
Daniel Weiskopf , VISUS, University of Stuttgart
Node-link diagrams are an effective and popular visualization approach for depicting hierarchical structures and for showing parent-child relationships. In this paper, we present the results of an eye tracking experiment investigating traditional, orthogonal, and radial node-link tree layouts as a piece of empirical basis for choosing between those layouts. Eye tracking was used to identify visual exploration behaviors of participants that were asked to solve a typical hierarchy exploration task by inspecting a static tree diagram: finding the least common ancestor of a given set of marked leaf nodes. To uncover exploration strategies, we examined fixation points, duration, and saccades of participants' gaze trajectories. For the non-radial diagrams, we additionally investigated the effect of diagram orientation by switching the position of the root node to each of the four main orientations. We also recorded and analyzed correctness of answers as well as completion times in addition to the eye movement data. We found out that traditional and orthogonal tree layouts significantly outperform radial tree layouts for the given task. Furthermore, by applying trajectory analysis techniques we uncovered that participants cross-checked their task solution more often in the radial than in the non-radial layouts.
Hierarchy visualization, node-link layout, eye tracking, user study.
Michael Burch, Natalia Konevtsova, Julian Heinrich, Markus Hoeferlin, Daniel Weiskopf, "Evaluation of Traditional, Orthogonal, and Radial Tree Diagrams by an Eye Tracking Study", IEEE Transactions on Visualization & Computer Graphics, vol.17, no. 12, pp. 2440-2448, Dec. 2011, doi:10.1109/TVCG.2011.193
[1] A.-L. Barabasi and R. Albert, Emergence of scaling in random networks. Science, 286: 509–512, 1999.
[2] C. Bennett, J. Ryall, L. Spalteholz, and A. Gooch, The aesthetics of graph visualization. In Proceedings of Computational Aesthetics in Graphics, Visualization, and Imaging, pages 57–64, 2007.
[3] M. Burch, F. Beck, and S. Diehl, Timeline Trees: visualizing sequences of transactions in information hierarchies. In Proceedings of Advanced Visual Interfaces (AVI '08), pages 75–82, 2008.
[4] M. Burch, F. Bott, F. Beck, and S. Diehl, Cartesian vs. radial – a comparative evaluation of two visualization tools. In Proceedings of 4th International Symposium on Visual Computing (ISVC '08), pages 151–160, 2008.
[5] M. Burch and S. Diehl, TimeRadarTrees: Visualizing dynamic compound digraphs. Computer Graphics Forum, 27 (3): 823–830, 2008.
[6] W. S. Cleveland and R. McGill, An experiment in graphical perception. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 25 (5): 491–501, 1986.
[7] G. di Battista, P. Eades, R. Tamassia, and I. G. Tollis, Graph Drawing:Algorithms for the Visualization of Graphs. Prentice Hall, 1998.
[8] S. Diehl, F. Beck, and M. Burch, Uncovering strengths and weaknesses of radial visualizations—an empirical approach. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 16 (6): 935–942, 2010.
[9] G. M. Draper, Y. Livnat, and R. F. Riesenfeld, A survey of radial methods for information visualization. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 15 (5): 759–776, 2009.
[10] P. Eades, Drawing free trees. Bulletin of the Institute for Combinatorics and its Applications, 5: 10–36, 1992.
[11] L. Euler, Solutio problematis ad geometriam situs pertinentis. Commen-tarii Academiae Scientiarum Petropolitanae, 8: 128–140, 1741.
[12] S. Grivet, D. Auber, J. Domenger, and G. Melançon, Bubble tree drawing algorithm. In Proceedings of International Conference on Computer Vision and Graphics (ICCVG '04), pages 633–641, 2004.
[13] I. Herman, G. Melan$cLon, M. M. de Ruiter, and M. Delest, Latour – a tree visualisation system. In Proceedings of Symposium on Graph Drawing (GD '99), pages 392–399, 1999.
[14] D. C. Howell, Statistical Methods for Psychology. Wadsworth Publishing, third edition, 1994.
[15] M. Hubert and E. Vandervieren, An adjusted boxplot for skewed distributions. Computational Statistics and Data Analysis, 52: 5186–5201, 2008.
[16] A. Kobsa, User experiments with tree visualization systems. In Proceedings of IEEE Symposium on Information Visualization (InfoVis '04), pages 9–16, 2004.
[17] C.-C. Lin and H.-C. Yen, On balloon drawings of rooted trees. Graphics Algorithms and Applications, 11 (2): 431–452, 2007.
[18] M. J. McGuffin and J.-M. Robert, Quantifying the space-efficiency of 2D graphical representations of trees. Information Visualization, 9 (2): 115– 140, 2010.
[19] G. Melançon and I. Herman, Circular drawings of rooted trees. Technical report, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1998.
[20] M. Pohl, M. Schmitt, and S. Diehl, Comparing readability of graph layouts using eyetracking and task-oriented analysis. In Proceedings of Computational Aesthetics (CAe '09), pages 49–56, 2009.
[21] E. M. Reingold and J. S. Tilford, Tidier drawings of trees. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 7 (2): 223–228, 1981.
[22] R. Rosenholtz, Y. Li, J. Mansfield, and Z. Jin, Feature congestion: A measure of display clutter. In Proceedings of SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '05), pages 761–770, 2005.
[23] J. T. Stasko, R. Catrambone, M. Guzdial, and K. McDonald, An evaluation of space-filling information visualizations for depicting hierarchical structures. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 53 (5): 663–694, 2000.
[24] Y. Wang, S. T. Teoh, and K.-L. Ma, Evaluating the effectiveness of tree visualization systems for knowledge discovery. In Proceedings of Joint Eurographics - IEEE VGTC Symposium on Visualization, pages 67–74, 2006.
16 ms
(Ver 2.0)

Marketing Automation Platform Marketing Automation Tool