Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Christoph Bösch 0002
dblp:181/2338 · also Christoph Michael Bösch
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2012
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Computer graphics and multimedia
1 paper |
Visualization and visual analytics · 100% | |
| Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
1 paper |
Usability and user experience research · 100% |
Topics — the 1 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Visualization and visual analytics › visualization evaluation
information visualization evaluation |
0.1 | 1 | 2012 | Evaluating the Effect of Style in Information Visualization · IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 2012 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
between-subject online study · 0.3
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2012 | Evaluating the Effect of Style in Information VisualizationabstractThis paper reports on a between-subject, comparative online study of three information visualization demonstrators that each displayed the same dataset by way of an identical scatterplot technique, yet were different in style in terms of visual and interactive embellishment. We validated stylistic adherence and integrity through a separate experiment in which a small cohort of participants assigned our three demonstrators to predefined groups of stylistic examples, after which they described the styles with their own words. From the online study, we discovered significant differences in how participants execute specific interaction operations, and the types of insights that followed from them. However, in spite of significant differences in apparent usability, enjoyability and usefulness between the style demonstrators, no variation was found on the self-reported depth, expert-rated depth, confidence or difficulty of the resulting insights. Three different methods of insight analysis have been applied, revealing how style impacts the creation of insights, ranging from higher-level pattern seeking to a more reflective and interpretative engagement with content, which is what underlies the patterns. As this study only forms the first step in determining how the impact of style in information visualization could be best evaluated, we propose several guidelines and tips on how to gather, compare and categorize insights through an online evaluation study, particularly in terms of analyzing the concise, yet wide variety of insights and observations in a trustworthy and reproducable manner. Andrew Vande Moere, Martin Tomitsch, Christoph Wimmer, Christoph Bösch 0002, Thomas Grechenig |
IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. | 4 |