Abstract Visual fixation on one's tool(s) takes much attention away from one's primary task. Following the belief that the best tools ‘disappear’ and become invisible to the user, we present a study comparing visual fixations (eye gaze within locations on a graphical display) and performance for mouse, pen, and physical slider user interfaces. Participants conducted a controlled, yet representative, color matching task that required user interaction representative of many data exploration tasks such as parameter exploration of medical or fuel cell data. We demonstrate that users may spend up to 95% fewer visual fixations on physical sliders versus standard mouse and pen tools without any loss in performance for a generalized visual performance task.

Spatialization displays use a geographic metaphor to arrange non-spatial data. For example, spatializations are commonly applied to document collections so that document themes appear as geographic features such as hills. Many common spatialization interfaces use a 3-D landscape metaphor to present data. However, it is not clear whether 3-D spatializations afford improved speed and accuracy for user tasks compared to similar 2-D spatializations. We describe a user study comparing users' ability to remember dot displays, 2-D landscapes, and 3-D landscapes for two different data densities (500 vs. 1000 points). Participants' visual memory was statistically more accurate when viewing dot displays and 3-D landscapes compared to 2-D landscapes. Furthermore, accuracy remembering a spatialization was significantly better overall for denser spatializations. These results are of benefit to visualization designers who are contemplating the best ways to present data using spatialization techniques.