Developing Implicit Uncertainty Visualization Methods Motivated by Theories in Decision Science

S. Deitrick, E. Wentz
{"title":"Developing Implicit Uncertainty Visualization Methods Motivated by Theories in Decision Science","authors":"S. Deitrick, E. Wentz","doi":"10.1080/00045608.2015.1012635","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Agreement between public policy decision makers and geographic information systems and visualization researchers about the importance of uncertainty in decision support sits in contrast to a disconnect in approaches to incorporating uncertainty into decision support tools. This disconnect does not arise from how these two groups define uncertainty but instead occurs because they approach uncertainty from different problem perspectives (Miller et al. 2008; Pohl 2011). Public policy decision makers regularly contend with uncertainty based on how proposed policies will affect the future, resulting in a solutions-oriented approach that relates uncertainty of future conditions to policy outcomes. For researchers, uncertainty more often reflects unknowns in data values or modeling processes, such as the difference between a measured or predicted value and the actual value, resulting in a knowledge-production approach that relates uncertainty to the validity and legitimacy of methods, models, and data to produce knowledge. The research presented here contends that this gap between research and practice (Brown and Vari 1992; von Winterfeldt 2013) stems from these differing perspectives. To bridge this gap, we examine decision science theories to explain decision makers’ solutions-oriented approach to uncertainty. Decision science is concerned with understanding and improving how individuals or groups identify problems, make decisions, and learn from the outcomes. We then present a new methodology, implicit uncertainty visualization, that reflects how decision makers contend with uncertainty. Bridging this gap opens up opportunities to develop visualization methods and tools that help decision makers better deal with uncertainty in practice.","PeriodicalId":80485,"journal":{"name":"Annals of the Association of American Geographers. Association of American Geographers","volume":"105 1","pages":"531 - 551"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00045608.2015.1012635","citationCount":"18","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of the Association of American Geographers. Association of American Geographers","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00045608.2015.1012635","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 18

Abstract

Agreement between public policy decision makers and geographic information systems and visualization researchers about the importance of uncertainty in decision support sits in contrast to a disconnect in approaches to incorporating uncertainty into decision support tools. This disconnect does not arise from how these two groups define uncertainty but instead occurs because they approach uncertainty from different problem perspectives (Miller et al. 2008; Pohl 2011). Public policy decision makers regularly contend with uncertainty based on how proposed policies will affect the future, resulting in a solutions-oriented approach that relates uncertainty of future conditions to policy outcomes. For researchers, uncertainty more often reflects unknowns in data values or modeling processes, such as the difference between a measured or predicted value and the actual value, resulting in a knowledge-production approach that relates uncertainty to the validity and legitimacy of methods, models, and data to produce knowledge. The research presented here contends that this gap between research and practice (Brown and Vari 1992; von Winterfeldt 2013) stems from these differing perspectives. To bridge this gap, we examine decision science theories to explain decision makers’ solutions-oriented approach to uncertainty. Decision science is concerned with understanding and improving how individuals or groups identify problems, make decisions, and learn from the outcomes. We then present a new methodology, implicit uncertainty visualization, that reflects how decision makers contend with uncertainty. Bridging this gap opens up opportunities to develop visualization methods and tools that help decision makers better deal with uncertainty in practice.
基于决策科学理论的隐式不确定性可视化方法研究
公共政策决策者与地理信息系统和可视化研究人员之间关于不确定性在决策支持中的重要性的共识,与将不确定性纳入决策支持工具的方法的脱节形成鲜明对比。这种脱节不是源于这两个群体如何定义不确定性,而是因为他们从不同的问题角度看待不确定性(Miller et al. 2008;波尔2011)。公共政策决策者经常根据拟议的政策将如何影响未来来应对不确定性,从而形成一种以解决方案为导向的方法,将未来条件的不确定性与政策结果联系起来。对于研究人员来说,不确定性更多地反映了数据值或建模过程中的未知因素,例如测量值或预测值与实际值之间的差异,从而导致知识生产方法将不确定性与产生知识的方法、模型和数据的有效性和合法性联系起来。这里提出的研究认为,研究与实践之间的差距(Brown and Vari 1992;von Winterfeldt 2013)源于这些不同的观点。为了弥补这一差距,我们研究了决策科学理论来解释决策者对不确定性的解决方案导向方法。决策科学关注的是理解和改进个人或群体如何识别问题,做出决策,并从结果中学习。然后,我们提出了一种新的方法,隐式不确定性可视化,这反映了决策者如何应对不确定性。弥合这一差距为开发可视化方法和工具提供了机会,这些方法和工具可以帮助决策者更好地处理实践中的不确定性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信