Learning Objectives, Insights, and Assessments: How Specification Formats Impact Design
Elsie Lee-Robbins, Shiqing He, Eytan Adar

TL;DR
This study investigates how different specification formats—learning objectives, insights, and assessments—affect the effectiveness of visualization design guidance through a large-scale experiment, revealing that learning objectives most improve visualization selection.
Contribution
The paper introduces a large-scale experiment comparing three specification formats, demonstrating their distinct benefits in guiding visualization design and selection.
Findings
Learning objectives most improve visualization selection.
All specification types outperform no specification.
Assessments are crucial when specifications are insufficient.
Abstract
Despite the ubiquity of communicative visualizations, specifying communicative intent during design is ad hoc. Whether we are selecting from a set of visualizations, commissioning someone to produce them, or creating them ourselves, an effective way of specifying intent can help guide this process. Ideally, we would have a concise and shared specification language. In previous work, we have argued that communicative intents can be viewed as a learning/assessment problem (i.e., what should the reader learn and what test should they do well on). Learning-based specification formats are linked (e.g., assessments are derived from objectives) but some may more effectively specify communicative intent. Through a large-scale experiment, we studied three specification types: learning objectives, insights, and assessments. Participants, guided by one of these specifications, rated their…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
