While feminist and critical data theories have long critiqued the use of data to uphold a positivist-informed view about science, few examples offer alternative methods to display scientific constructs. In response, we present Data and Me: an exhibit informed by feminist and critical data theories, which we designed and launched at a local science museum. Data and Me introduces museum visitors to data using a [AT]:hugging_face: vibe -- a vibe that signals that data can be [hashtag]slow, [hashtag]handmade, and [hashtag]personal. We designed this vibe to be noticeably different than the [AT]Science vibe in the rest of the museum. Throughout our design process, we adapted visualization vibes as an analytic and generative tool in the context of a science museum. We present four design choices that enable the design of a vibe: visual, topical, material, and crediting. We discuss how our exhibit aligns with ongoing discussions about alternative research outcomes and calls for plurality in HCI.

Abstract Visualization researchers utilize workshops both for applied research and to engage different populations with visualization‐based activities. While there are many benefits to running visualization workshops, their utility and impact rely on the presence of a researcher who has deep knowledge about visualization theory and practice. In this work, we introduce workshop‐in‐a‐box as a design concept intended to challenge the researcher‐centric approach to data physicalization workshops. Through a design study with a socially innovative organization, we deployed several data physicalization workshops that our collaborator ran instead of us. Based on this experience, along with two accompanying case studies that validate the concept, we present material and procedural considerations for how to put data physicalization workshops into a box and the implications it has for extending visualization research outside the bounds of academia.

Abstract Decades of advocacy for reproducibility and replication have advanced open, transparent practices in the sciences. However, traditional notions of reproducibility fit poorly with design‐oriented visualization research, where insights emerge through subjective, situated, and iterative work. So how can we ensure rigor and transparency in processes that are inherently unreproducible? To introduce transparency in design‐oriented research, we propose to focus on traceability: surfacing the origin and development of research contributions based on rich sets of artifacts documenting the design process. We investigated traceability through a collaborative autoethnographic reflection that builds on several years of work exploring ways to make design‐oriented research transparent. This exploration includes an experiment to build a tool to support traceability, which we called tRRRacer. The tRRRacer tool provided a testbed for us to operationalize the three tenets of a traceable process: (1) Record abundant, annotated artifacts representative of research activities; (2) Report curated research threads that articulate rationale and evolution of the process, allowing others to (3) Read via interfaces that help retrace claims and assess plausibility. Reflecting on our experiences, we contribute a theorization of traceability and reflections on how we might support it.

Data-driven decision making has become a popular practice in science, industry, and public policy. Yet data alone, as an imperfect and partial representation of reality, is often insufficient to make good analysis decisions. Knowledge about the context of a dataset, its strengths and weaknesses, and its applicability for certain tasks is essential. Analysts are often not only familiar with the data itself, but also have data hunches about their analysis subject. In this work, we present an interview study with analysts from a wide range of domains and with varied expertise and experience, inquiring about the role of contextual knowledge. We provide insights into how data is insufficient in analysts' workflows and how they incorporate other sources of knowledge into their analysis. We analyzed how knowledge of data shaped their analysis outcome. Based on the results, we suggest design opportunities to better and more robustly consider both knowledge and data in analysis processes.

A growing body of work draws on feminist thinking to challenge assumptions about how people engage with and use visualizations. This work draws on feminist values, driving design and research guidelines that account for the influences of power and neglect. This prior work is largely prescriptive, however, forgoing articulation of how feminist theories of knowledge - or feminist epistemology - can alter research design and outcomes. At the core of our work is an engagement with feminist epistemology, drawing attention to how a new framework for how we know what we know enabled us to overcome intellectual tensions in our research. Specifically, we focus on the theoretical concept of entanglement, central to recent feminist scholarship, and contribute: a history of entanglement in the broader scope of feminist theory; an articulation of the main points of entanglement theory for a visualization context; and a case study of research outcomes as evidence of the potential of feminist epistemology to impact visualization research. This work answers a call in the community to embrace a broader set of theoretical and epistemic foundations and provides a starting point for bringing feminist theories into visualization research.

This paper presents discursive patinas, a technique to visualize discussions onto data visualizations, inspired by how people leave traces in the physical world. While data visualizations are widely discussed in online communities and social media, comments tend to be displayed separately from the visualization and we lack ways to relate these discussions back to the content of the visualization, e.g., to situate comments, explain visual patterns, or question assumptions. In our visualization annotation interface, users can designate areas within the visualization. Discursive patinas are made of overlaid visual marks (anchors), attached to textual comments with category labels, likes, and replies. By coloring and styling the anchors, a meta visualization emerges, showing what and where people comment and annotate the visualization. These patinas show regions of heavy discussions, recent commenting activity, and the distribution of questions, suggestions, or personal stories. We ran workshops with 90 students, domain experts, and visualization researchers to study how people use anchors to discuss visualizations and how patinas influence people's understanding of the discussion. Our results show that discursive patinas improve the ability to navigate discussions and guide people to comments that help understand, contextualize, or scrutinize the visualization. We discuss the potential of anchors and patinas to support discursive engagements, including critical readings of visualizations, design feedback, and feminist approaches to data visualization.

A common research process in visualization is for visualization researchers to collaborate with domain experts to solve particular applied data problems. While there is existing guidance and expertise around how to structure collaborations to strengthen research contributions, there is comparatively little guidance on how to navigate the implications of, and power produced through the socio-technical entanglements of collaborations. In this paper, we qualitatively analyze reflective interviews of past participants of collaborations from multiple perspectives: visualization graduate students, visualization professors, and domain collaborators. We juxtapose the perspectives of these individuals, revealing tensions about the tools that are built and the relationships that are formed — a complex web of competing motivations. Through the lens of matters of care, we interpret this web, concluding with considerations that both trouble and necessitate reformation of current patterns around collaborative work in visualization design studies to promote more equitable, useful, and care-ful outcomes.

The trouble with data is that it frequently provides only an imperfect representation of a phenomenon of interest. Experts who are familiar with their datasets will often make implicit, mental corrections when analyzing a dataset, or will be cautious not to be overly confident about their findings if caveats are present. However, personal knowledge about the caveats of a dataset is typically not incorporated in a structured way, which is problematic if others who lack that knowledge interpret the data. In this work, we define such analysts' knowledge about datasets as data hunches. We differentiate data hunches from uncertainty and discuss types of hunches. We then explore ways of recording data hunches, and, based on a prototypical design, develop recommendations for designing visualizations that support data hunches. We conclude by discussing various challenges associated with data hunches, including the potential for harm and challenges for trust and privacy. We envision that data hunches will empower analysts to externalize their knowledge, facilitate collaboration and communication, and support the ability to learn from others' data hunches.