Graphics convey numerical information very efficiently, but rely on a different set of mental processes than tabular displays. Here, we present a study relating demographic characteristics and visual skills to perception of graphical lineups. We conclude that lineups are essentially a classification test in a visual domain, and that performance on the lineup protocol is associated with general aptitude, rather than specific tasks such as card rotation and spatial manipulation. We also examine the possibility that specific graphical tasks may be associated with certain visual skills and conclude that more research is necessary to understand which visual skills are required in order to understand certain plot types.

Visualizations are great tools of communications-they summarize findings and quickly convey main messages to our audience. As designers of charts we have to make sure that information is shown with a minimum of distortion. We have to also consider illusions and other perceptual limitations of our audience. In this paper we discuss the effect and strength of the line width illusion, a Muller-Lyer type illusion, on designs related to displaying associations between categorical variables. Parallel sets and hammock plots are both affected by line width illusions. We introduce the common-angle plot as an alternative method for displaying categorical data in a manner that minimizes the effect from perceptual illusions. Results from user studies both highlight the need for addressing line-width illusions in displays and provide evidence that common angle charts successfully resolve this issue.

Lineups have been established as tools for visual testing similar to standard statistical inference tests, allowing us to evaluate the validity of graphical findings in an objective manner. In simulation studies lineups have been shown as being efficient: the power of visual tests is comparable to classical tests while being much less stringent in terms of distributional assumptions made. This makes lineups versatile, yet powerful, tools in situations where conditions for regular statistical tests are not or cannot be met. In this paper we introduce lineups as a tool for evaluating the power of competing graphical designs. We highlight some of the theoretical properties and then show results from two studies evaluating competing designs: both studies are designed to go to the limits of our perceptual abilities to highlight differences between designs. We use both accuracy and speed of evaluation as measures of a successful design. The first study compares the choice of coordinate system: polar versus cartesian coordinates. The results show strong support in favor of cartesian coordinates in finding fast and accurate answers to spotting patterns. The second study is aimed at finding shift differences between distributions. Both studies are motivated by data problems that we have recently encountered, and explore using simulated data to evaluate the plot designs under controlled conditions. Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk) is used to conduct the studies. The lineups provide an effective mechanism for objectively evaluating plot designs.

We propose a new framework for visualising tables of counts, proportions and probabilities. We call our framework product plots, alluding to the computation of area as a product of height and width, and the statistical concept of generating a joint distribution from the product of conditional and marginal distributions. The framework, with extensions, is sufficient to encompass over 20 visualisations previously described in fields of statistical graphics and infovis, including bar charts, mosaic plots, treemaps, equal area plots and fluctuation diagrams.

How do we know if what we see is really there? When visualizing data, how do we avoid falling into the trap of apophenia where we see patterns in random noise? Traditionally, infovis has been concerned with discovering new relationships, and statistics with preventing spurious relationships from being reported. We pull these opposing poles closer with two new techniques for rigorous statistical inference of visual discoveries. The "Rorschach" helps the analyst calibrate their understanding of uncertainty and "line-up" provides a protocol for assessing the significance of visual discoveries, protecting against the discovery of spurious structure.

Association rules are amongst the most important patterns that can be discovered using data mining. Their automatic discovery is supported by most, if not all, data mining software tools. Moreover, many techniques have been devised to lter the most interesting (in many senses) rules from the complete set of discovered rules, such that the users are not swamped by results. However, association rules are actually hard to understand; even more so if one only looks at the most interesting rules. For example, rather strong correlations between attributes are not always obvious from the discovered rules. Similarly, a deeper explanation of related association rules may be missing from the rule set. In this paper we show how Mosaic plots and, especially, their variant called Double Decker plots, can be used to visualize association rules. These plots visualize the contingency table that yields the association rule as well as the other potential rules in that table, whether they meet the thresholds or not. This gives a deeper understanding on the nature of the correlation between the left-hand side of the rule and the right-hand side. Moreover, we show how an interactive use of these plots helps the user to understand the relationship between related association rules.