↓ Skip to main content

Acquired Codes of Meaning in Data Visualization and Infographics: Beyond Perceptual Primitives

Overview of attention for article published in IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
155 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Acquired Codes of Meaning in Data Visualization and Infographics: Beyond Perceptual Primitives
Published in
IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, October 2015
DOI 10.1109/tvcg.2015.2467321
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lydia Byrne, Daniel Angus, Janet Wiles

Abstract

While information visualization frameworks and heuristics have traditionally been reluctant to include acquired codes of meaning, designers are making use of them in a wide variety of ways. Acquired codes leverage a user's experience to understand the meaning of a visualization. They range from figurative visualizations which rely on the reader's recognition of shapes, to conventional arrangements of graphic elements which represent particular subjects. In this study, we used content analysis to codify acquired meaning in visualization. We applied the content analysis to a set of infographics and data visualizations which are exemplars of innovative and effective design. 88% of the infographics and 71% of data visualizations in the sample contain at least one use of figurative visualization. Conventions on the arrangement of graphics are also widespread in the sample. In particular, a comparison of representations of time and other quantitative data showed that conventions can be specific to a subject. These results suggest that there is a need for information visualization research to expand its scope beyond perceptual channels, to include social and culturally constructed meaning. Our paper demonstrates a viable method for identifying figurative techniques and graphic conventions and integrating them into heuristics for visualization design.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 155 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 2 1%
United States 2 1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Korea, Republic of 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Unknown 146 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 43 28%
Student > Master 21 14%
Student > Bachelor 16 10%
Student > Postgraduate 8 5%
Professor 7 5%
Other 27 17%
Unknown 33 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 73 47%
Design 17 11%
Psychology 6 4%
Social Sciences 6 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 3%
Other 16 10%
Unknown 33 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 May 2023.
All research outputs
#14,602,949
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics
#1,696
of 2,300 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#136,789
of 295,226 outputs
Outputs of similar age from IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics
#37
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,300 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 295,226 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.