Louis Williams, Kelsey J. Mulder, Andrew Charlton-Perez, Matthew Lickiss, Alison Black, R. McCloy, E. McSorley, Joe Young
{"title":"理解不确定性表征,眼球追踪研究-第2部分:专业知识的影响","authors":"Louis Williams, Kelsey J. Mulder, Andrew Charlton-Perez, Matthew Lickiss, Alison Black, R. McCloy, E. McSorley, Joe Young","doi":"10.5194/gc-6-111-2023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. As the ability to make predictions regarding uncertainty information\nrepresenting natural hazards increases, an important question for those\ndesigning and communicating hazard forecasts is how visualizations of\nuncertainty influence understanding amongst the intended, potentially\nvaried, target audiences. End-users have a wide range of differing expertise\nand backgrounds, possibly influencing the decision-making process they\nundertake for a given forecast presentation. Our previous, Part 1 study\n(Mulder et al., 2023) examined how the presentation of uncertainty\ninformation influenced end-user decision making. Here, we shift the focus to\nexamine the decisions and reactions of participants with differing areas of expertise\n(meteorology, psychology, and graphic-communication students) when presented\nwith varied hypothetical forecast representations (boxplot, fan plot, or\nspaghetti plot with and without median lines) using the same eye-tracking\nmethods and experiments. Participants made decisions about a fictional\nscenario involving the choices between ships of different sizes in the face\nof varying ice thickness forecasts. Eye movements to the graph area and key\nand how they changed over time (early, intermediate, and later viewing\nperiods) were examined. More fixations (maintained gaze on one location)\nand more fixation time were spent on the graph and key during early and\nintermediate periods of viewing, particularly for boxplots and fan plots.\nThe inclusion of median lines led to less fixations being made on all graph\ntypes during early and intermediate viewing periods. No difference in eye\nmovement behaviour was found due to expertise; however, those with greater\nexpertise were more accurate in their decisions, particularly during more\ndifficult scenarios. Where scientific producers seek to draw users to the\ncentral estimate, an anchoring line can significantly reduce cognitive load,\nleading both experts and non-experts to make more rational decisions. When\nasking users to consider extreme scenarios or uncertainty, different prior\nexpertise can lead to significantly different cognitive loads for processing\ninformation, with an impact on one's ability to make appropriate decisions.\n","PeriodicalId":52877,"journal":{"name":"Geoscience Communication","volume":"34 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Understanding representations of uncertainty, an eye-tracking study – Part 2: The effect of expertise\",\"authors\":\"Louis Williams, Kelsey J. Mulder, Andrew Charlton-Perez, Matthew Lickiss, Alison Black, R. McCloy, E. McSorley, Joe Young\",\"doi\":\"10.5194/gc-6-111-2023\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract. As the ability to make predictions regarding uncertainty information\\nrepresenting natural hazards increases, an important question for those\\ndesigning and communicating hazard forecasts is how visualizations of\\nuncertainty influence understanding amongst the intended, potentially\\nvaried, target audiences. End-users have a wide range of differing expertise\\nand backgrounds, possibly influencing the decision-making process they\\nundertake for a given forecast presentation. Our previous, Part 1 study\\n(Mulder et al., 2023) examined how the presentation of uncertainty\\ninformation influenced end-user decision making. Here, we shift the focus to\\nexamine the decisions and reactions of participants with differing areas of expertise\\n(meteorology, psychology, and graphic-communication students) when presented\\nwith varied hypothetical forecast representations (boxplot, fan plot, or\\nspaghetti plot with and without median lines) using the same eye-tracking\\nmethods and experiments. Participants made decisions about a fictional\\nscenario involving the choices between ships of different sizes in the face\\nof varying ice thickness forecasts. Eye movements to the graph area and key\\nand how they changed over time (early, intermediate, and later viewing\\nperiods) were examined. More fixations (maintained gaze on one location)\\nand more fixation time were spent on the graph and key during early and\\nintermediate periods of viewing, particularly for boxplots and fan plots.\\nThe inclusion of median lines led to less fixations being made on all graph\\ntypes during early and intermediate viewing periods. No difference in eye\\nmovement behaviour was found due to expertise; however, those with greater\\nexpertise were more accurate in their decisions, particularly during more\\ndifficult scenarios. Where scientific producers seek to draw users to the\\ncentral estimate, an anchoring line can significantly reduce cognitive load,\\nleading both experts and non-experts to make more rational decisions. When\\nasking users to consider extreme scenarios or uncertainty, different prior\\nexpertise can lead to significantly different cognitive loads for processing\\ninformation, with an impact on one's ability to make appropriate decisions.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":52877,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Geoscience Communication\",\"volume\":\"34 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Geoscience Communication\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-6-111-2023\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Geoscience Communication","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5194/gc-6-111-2023","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
摘要随着对代表自然灾害的不确定性信息进行预测的能力的提高,对于那些设计和传播灾害预测的人来说,一个重要的问题是不确定性的可视化如何影响预期的、可能变化的目标受众的理解。最终用户具有广泛的不同专业知识和背景,可能会影响他们对给定预测演示所进行的决策过程。我们之前的第1部分研究(Mulder et al., 2023)研究了不确定性信息的呈现如何影响最终用户的决策。在这里,我们将焦点转移到使用相同的眼球追踪方法和实验,研究不同专业领域(气象学、心理学和图形传播专业的学生)的参与者在面对不同的假设预测表示(箱线图、扇形图或有和没有中线的意大利面图)时的决策和反应。参与者在一个虚构的场景中做出决定,在不同的冰厚预测中选择不同大小的船只。研究人员检查了眼球在图形区域和键上的运动,以及它们随时间(早期、中期和后期)的变化情况。在观看的早期和中期,特别是箱形图和扇形图,更多的注视(保持注视一个位置)和更多的注视时间花在图表和键上。在早期和中期观看期间,中间线的包含导致对所有图形类型的注视减少。由于专业知识,没有发现眼球运动行为的差异;然而,那些拥有更高专业知识的人在他们的决定中更准确,特别是在更困难的情况下。当科学生产者试图将用户吸引到中心估计时,锚定线可以显着减少认知负荷,引导专家和非专家做出更理性的决策。当要求用户考虑极端情况或不确定性时,不同的先验专业知识会导致处理信息的认知负荷显著不同,从而影响用户做出适当决策的能力。
Understanding representations of uncertainty, an eye-tracking study – Part 2: The effect of expertise
Abstract. As the ability to make predictions regarding uncertainty information
representing natural hazards increases, an important question for those
designing and communicating hazard forecasts is how visualizations of
uncertainty influence understanding amongst the intended, potentially
varied, target audiences. End-users have a wide range of differing expertise
and backgrounds, possibly influencing the decision-making process they
undertake for a given forecast presentation. Our previous, Part 1 study
(Mulder et al., 2023) examined how the presentation of uncertainty
information influenced end-user decision making. Here, we shift the focus to
examine the decisions and reactions of participants with differing areas of expertise
(meteorology, psychology, and graphic-communication students) when presented
with varied hypothetical forecast representations (boxplot, fan plot, or
spaghetti plot with and without median lines) using the same eye-tracking
methods and experiments. Participants made decisions about a fictional
scenario involving the choices between ships of different sizes in the face
of varying ice thickness forecasts. Eye movements to the graph area and key
and how they changed over time (early, intermediate, and later viewing
periods) were examined. More fixations (maintained gaze on one location)
and more fixation time were spent on the graph and key during early and
intermediate periods of viewing, particularly for boxplots and fan plots.
The inclusion of median lines led to less fixations being made on all graph
types during early and intermediate viewing periods. No difference in eye
movement behaviour was found due to expertise; however, those with greater
expertise were more accurate in their decisions, particularly during more
difficult scenarios. Where scientific producers seek to draw users to the
central estimate, an anchoring line can significantly reduce cognitive load,
leading both experts and non-experts to make more rational decisions. When
asking users to consider extreme scenarios or uncertainty, different prior
expertise can lead to significantly different cognitive loads for processing
information, with an impact on one's ability to make appropriate decisions.