DHQ: Digital Humanities Quarterly
2020
Volume 14 Number 3
Volume 14 Number 3
The Fold: Rethinking Interactivity in Data Visualization
Abstract
We propose the philosophical notion of the fold as an evocative vocabulary for the design and critique of interactive data visualizations. An expanding range of application areas, such as digital art history and literary studies, illustrates the potential of data visualization for research and education in the humanities. Coinciding with the increasing currency of data as evidence in the humanities, this research addresses a growing interest in data visualization for visual analysis and argumentation. For example, cultural collection visualizations promise a range of possibilities for visual and interactive representations of digital cultural heritage, used both for free exploration and focused research. Based on the concept of the fold, prominently advanced by Gilles Deleuze, this paper outlines a critical framework that draws attention towards the complexity of the underlying data. The fold offers a way to analyze and conceptualize visualizations through the lens of three integrated operations: explication, implication, and complication. It is an opportunity to think of interactive visualizations as portals into coherent, elastic, and ultimately infinite information spaces. Accordingly, it rejects the separation between interactivity and visual encoding and draws attention to the transitions between multiple states of a visualization. We identify design patterns of the fold in data visualizations, devise a framework for the critical interpretation of interactivity in data visualization, and demonstrate the implications for the digital humanities.
Introduction
... its envelopments and developments, its implications and explications, are nonetheless particular movements that must be understood in a universal Unity ... [Deleuze 2006, 25]
While questions of visual encoding – the way visual variables, such as position,
size, shape, color, or density, are used to represent data in information
visualizations [Bertin 1983] – have always been central to
visualization research and design, there has been considerable interest in the role
of interactivity and animation on engagement, insight, and comprehension [Shneiderman 1983]
[Woods 1984]
[Elmqvist et al. 2011]. However, when taken up in the humanities, there is
arguably less attention devoted to the interactive capabilities of data visualization
in contrast to the visual encoding that is employed. This may be due to the fact that
there is limited guidance for designing or analyzing interactivity, especially for
visualizations of complex information spaces. A lower prioritization of interactivity
in visualization goes back to the, now quaint, visualization pipeline, that positions
user input at the very last step [Card et al. 1999]. We argue that the main
issue is the gap in the design process between devising visual encodings and
integrating interactive capabilities. While this gap is often bridged through
animated transitions, the resulting animations can be visually jarring [Chevalier et al. 2014] and could serve a range of possibly competing roles [Chevalier et al. 2016].
This is especially problematic when considering complex and multidimensional
datasets, as of cultural collections [Windhager et al. 2018] and other cases
from the field of the digital humanities. Although such collections are
unquestionably suitable for digital methods, an implementation, both theoretically as
well as practically, of the attributed qualities into rich and coherent data
visualizations often falls short. It can be challenging to arrive at interactive
visual representations that are meaningful and insightful, and enable a diverse set
of user tasks from explorative engagement to focused analysis. Furthermore, visual
information tends to be perceived as “true,” which has sparked a debate over the
role of the humanities in the design and interpretation of visualizations,
understanding data as interpretive and calling for more ambiguity in their graphical
expression [Drucker 2011].
We propose the notion of the fold, advanced by French philosopher Gilles Deleuze [Deleuze 2006], as a new way of interpreting and creating interactive
visualizations of complex information spaces. The fold sheds light on the complexity
of the underlying data and offers a new perspective on knowledge systems and their
representation. While written in dense philosophical prose, the concept of the fold
and the associated operations explication, implication, and complication can serve as
an illuminating lens on visual interfaces and their interactive capabilities. More
specifically, we believe that the fold offers an evocative design and research
vocabulary for the digital humanities that considers encoding and interaction aspects
in unison. We specifically want to bridge the theoretical and practical threads of
the digital humanities, which have been criticized for falling short in offering
inclusive, critical, and research-driven concepts that can serve as a guideline for
their practice [Risam 2015].
With this research, we transfer Deleuze’s notion of the fold to data visualization
and derive three concrete qualities for visualization design and critique in the
humanities: coherence, elasticity, and infinity. In a next step, we characterize the
manifestation of the fold’s operations and qualities in a range of exemplary
visualizations with the help of interpretive illustrations and concrete examples from
digital humanities projects. Lastly, we formulate a critical framework consisting of
principles and questions for the design and interpretation of interactive
visualizations and discuss open questions for future work at the intersection of data
visualization design and humanistic inquiry.
Related Work
This research is largely motivated by a recent surge of work on the visualization of
cultural heritage data, for which numerous visualization approaches have already been
proposed, yielding an abundance of visual interfaces and representation techniques
[Windhager et al. 2018]. Shneiderman’s widely cited visual information
seeking mantra “Overview first, zoom and filter, then details on
demand”
[Shneiderman 1996] may still hold, to a certain extent, but it has
already been challenged by alternative approaches that aim for serendipitous
discovery, generous views, open exploration, and bottom-up analysis [Dörk et al. 2011]
[Whitelaw 2015]
[Thudt et al. 2012]
[van Ham and Perer 2009]. However, a departure from the primacy of the overview
requires a careful reconsideration of the place for interactivity in data
visualization. For instance, while a lot of effort is put into the design of online
collections of museums, navigation oftentimes ends in impasses and the focus is set
too much on single objects instead of relations and references [Kreiseler et al. 2017]. While casual users might benefit from such a reduced
visual complexity, the enabling and integration of humanist inquiry through and into
visualizations still proves to be challenging [Windhager et al. 2019]. We aim
to continue this line of research and focus more closely on the role of interactivity
in visualization of cultural heritage data.
To this end, a range of techniques and methods have been proposed. The visualization
of complex datasets, among other, calls for the careful choice of visual variables
and encodings [Bertin 1983]
[Carpendale 2003], the dynamic arrangement of elements between display
states [Woods 1984], and the interpretive comparison of data elements
and properties to reveal relationships and differences [Gleicher 2018].
However, when working with high-dimensional data, the identification and
interpretation of meaningful patterns and relationships can be a daunting enterprise.
For this, dimensionality reduction has become an important method for the visual
analysis of datasets containing multiple data dimensions and elements [Sacha et al. 2017]. Nevertheless, the resulting low-dimensional layouts can be
difficult to interpret and imply a range of projection errors [Stahnke et al. 2016]
[Wattenberg et al. 2016]. For dimensionality reduction to become more useful,
novel interaction techniques need to be devised that support iterative and
exploratory data analysis [Sacha et al. 2017].
The iterative analysis of data can be thought of as an ongoing information practice
that exhibits the characteristics of “flow”, i.e., high
levels of concentration, immersion, and motivation [Csikszentmihalyi 1990]
[Pace 2004]. Relating this and other theories [Shneiderman 1983]
[Woods 1984] to data visualization, the concept of fluid interaction
puts forward a user experience during which people smoothly navigate through a visual
interface, which supports an efficient and enjoyable sensemaking process [Elmqvist et al. 2011]. So far, an operationalization of such aspirational
concepts in visualization design proves to be difficult, especially in the sense of
making the animated display changes comprehensible [Chevalier et al. 2014].
While graphical animations which represent temporal change in data can be challenging
to comprehend [Tversky et al. 2002], several studies show that animated
transitions can support the perception of data visualizations and comprehend display
changes [Bederson and Boltman 2003]
[Heer and Robertson 2007]. However, the often used staggered animations are not
generally beneficial for visually tracking the elements during display changes [Chevalier et al. 2014]. We are especially interested in not only making display
changes perceptible but also how meaning can be encoded into the viewer-driven
animations resulting from interactive use of a visualization.
In all this, we are guided by a growing critical awareness about graphical interfaces
[Drucker 2011], data visualization [D’Ignazio and Klein 2016]
[Dörk et al. 2013], and data themselves [D’Ignazio and Klein 2020]
[Loukissas 2016]. Questions of how to include critical approaches and
diverse voices into their projects [Risam 2015], as well as how to take
an ethical approach to the creation and use of data visualizations [Hepworth and Church 2018] have concerned the digital humanities particularly. From
a study of digital humanities visualizations, Parry found that most project
descriptions and media coverage underlined the picturing and illustrating
characteristic of visualizations [Parry 2019], while the interpretive
analysis and critique of their performative materiality has largely remained an
aspiration [Drucker 2013]. Instead, Parry calls for the use of
enactment practices in data visualization, both in their conception and production as
well as analysis and critique [Parry 2019]. With this work, we want to
join these authors in their aspirations by conceptualizing the fold for data
visualization, providing both a theoretical framework for critique as well as a
metaphor for practical implementation.
The Fold
In the following, we briefly introduce Gilles Deleuze’s concept of the fold, in which
he links Leibniz’ baroque idea of monadology to postmodernism [Deleuze 2006]. Specifically, we focus on transferring some of Deleuze’s
thoughts on perception and information accumulation to the case of data
visualization, drawing mainly from the first part of “The Fold” and abstracting
vocabulary and concrete functional illustrations. Philosophy, in Deleuze’s sense,
creates concepts, and concepts produce an orientation or direction for thinking [Colebrook 2002, 15]. In this spirit, we examine the fold’s
operations, as proposed by Deleuze, to speculatively extend them into the realm of
digital information spaces and devise tentative principles for interactivity in data
visualization. The connection of Leibniz’ philosophical ideas to the fine arts and
postmodernist thinking has already been pointed out by Deleuze himself, as well as
others [Bredekamp 1988]. We aim to show how Deleuze’s ideas about the
baroque concept of monadology, and his postmodern take on the fold, open up promising
avenues for the design and interpretation of interactive visualizations.
Thinking through the Manifold
In “The Fold. Leibniz and the Baroque” (1988), Deleuze
(1925-1995) refers back to Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz’ (1646-1716) concept of
monadology, which rejected a dualist ontology (i.e., separation of body and soul)
and instead established the monad as the basic building block of the material
world [Leibniz 1898]. Leibniz had also briefly introduced the
metaphor of the fold as “a way to differentiate matter without
introducing discontinuity”
[Laerke 2010, 27]. Deleuze now reconstructs Leibniz’ philosophy
as baroque metaphysics, an “allegory of the world”
which in his sense contains the fold as an element of infinite iteration [Laerke 2010] to which postmodernism is deeply attached and from which
it can benefit in terms of thinking the complex, or, with Deleuze’s metaphor, the
manifold [Wagner 1995]. Deleuze proposes a new empiricism that is
based on a theory of difference and multiplicity as fundamental forces [Freitas 2016, 225], stating that monadologic systems are
composed of infinite folds, which consequently form the smallest unit of matter
[Deleuze 2006, 6]. The monad is filled with folds on two
levels: the “pleats of matter” and the “folds in the soul,” which are distinct and still
continuously interwoven. This metaphor also refers to the human body and soul,
making the distinction important for the understanding of the processes of
information interpretation and accumulation: following Deleuze, the monad (or
human) already holds all information, twisted into many folds. If it was
confronted with a new question or information on the level of the pleats of
matter, through the senses, the folds in the soul would automatically begin to
twist and turn, after which the resulting answer or links to other information
would suddenly become visible. The answer was already there, it was only hidden in
the manifold twists of the soul.
While Deleuze’s treatment of the fold is rather extensive and, in parts, elusive,
his description of the unfolding of information offers a useful vocabulary for the
conceptualization of (digital) information spaces. The related notion of the monad
has already been proposed as a unique perspective on social systems by Bruno
Latour and colleagues [Latour et al. 2012]. For them, the monad usefully
complicates the distinction between whole and part, a perspective that has been
put forward as an iterative mode of making sense of relational information spaces
[Dörk et al. 2014]. For Deleuze, this complication is concretely
manifested in the fold. He proposes a division of the world into the “actual” and the “virtual,”
which are mutually dependent and connected through folds, just as the monad is
divided into pleats of matter and soul, but still continuously interwoven.
Although Deleuze may not have meant “virtual” in the sense of “digital,”
the concept of the fold holds a powerful metaphor for the structure and
understanding of digital information spaces, in which only certain parts of the
available information are perceptible at a time, while the whole information space
remains invisibly present. Following Deleuze, the folds of information exist in
the virtual world mostly, because they are potentially infinite and offer an
unlimited range of capabilities. Still, everything within the monadologic system
is connected, although not always ascertainable [Freitas 2016].
Furthermore, the processes of information accumulation and analysis are to some
extent characterized by unpredictability, as the reasons for thought processes and
actions stay hidden from the monad:
Because the world is in the monad, each monad includes every series of the states of the world; but, because the monad is for the world, no one clearly contains the ‘reason’ of the series of which they are all a result, and which remains outside of them, just like the principle of their accord. [Deleuze 2006, 28]
Operations of the Fold
For Deleuze, the three operations “Explication–implication–complication” form the essential triad of the
fold [Deleuze 2006, 25]. The first two, explication and
implication, need to be understood as a pair of which one is reversing the other.
Deleuze describes them as processes of envelopment and development, focusing
subsequently on the monad as an inflection of the world. To make this process of
folding and flexing more vivid, we have abstracted illustrations inspired by
Deleuze’s own use of black-and-white drawings in “The Fold” (see Figure 1). Explication describes the process of
unfolding, e.g., opening a book, dividing something into its subsections, or
fanning out its multiple facets (see Figure 1,
left). On the opposite, implication refers to the commonly known process of
folding that reduces something in size and detail, e.g., closing an open book or
folding a paper. Deleuze draws our attention closely to these processes within
monadic systems: If something inside the monad is hidden through the process of
implication, what is folded still comprises everything else, though this is not
always perceivable with the human senses. Through the process of explication,
hidden connections become visible again, but the (un)folded entity nevertheless
possesses connections to all others. Unpredictable outcomes and new connections
can occur during folding and unfolding, as a fold can generate the sudden
juxtaposition of formerly opposite (and also opposing) points.
Figure 1.
The operations of the fold illustrated: Explication & implication
(left), and complication (right).At the intersection of the fold and monadologic theory, Deleuze introduces
complication as the third operation of the fold (see Figure 1, right). Here, he draws from medieval philosopher Nicholas of
Cusa (1401-1464) to explain the all-embracing function of folds for the mind and
the matter. For Cusa, everything that was outside the perceivable was divine
simplicity, which he defined as a “true folding” of the
opposite and contradictory, and named it “complicatio”
[Gandillac 1953]. In this thought system, whenever something was
inexplicable to humans, it was the “complicated” god that was able to explain
things outside of causal connections and rational thought. Deleuze shifts the
process of complication from the divine sphere as outside to the inside of human
information processing via his theory of the fold. The operation of complication
thus explains the process of information accumulation and connectedness of
everything perceivable, while also addressing its arbitrariness. Because
everything inside the monad is folded to infinity, every possibility already lies
inside of it, yet, it cannot expose itself in its entirety at any moment.
Surprising occurrences are thus not more than a “complicated” folding
process, in which connections are rearranged and only a part of the connected
universe becomes visible at a time.
The perpetual incompleteness of any knowledge is what makes this theory so
relevant for information representation, which aims to communicate complex
matters, but needs to make its omissions and reductions transparent. Folding
processes can disclose and even simplify ‘complicated’ occurrences: the moment of
collapsing an angle from 1 degree to 0 degree, when the eye can visually follow
the angle turning into a line, describes this process best. After having observed
the transition, the resulting line is not only a line but consists of two layers
and could still be seen as an angle; it comprises multiple folds of information
that we can only capture if we are able to follow and understand the operation of
the fold.
Qualities of the Fold
“... an elastic body still has cohering parts that form a fold, such that they are not separated into parts of parts but are rather divided to infinity in smaller and smaller folds that always retain a certain cohesion.” [Deleuze 2006, 6]In addition to the concrete operations of the fold, Deleuze’s opus constitutes a
unique and global proposition about the form and function of information spaces.
To relate the fold theory with visualization practice, we have abstracted three
overarching qualities – coherence, elasticity, and infinity – that align the fold
with interactive data visualizations in the context of humanistic inquiry.
Coherence
Instead of considering information ‘points’ as discrete objects, the fold
expresses the coherent quality of monadologic systems that are defined by
context and relations. Accordingly, the single data point in a visualization
stands for more than one expression, it is part of a system and defined through
its connections to other points of the network. As stated by Deleuze in the
opening quote of this section, this quality multiplies itself infinitely: No
matter how far the information space is passed through, each finding, output,
or information point possesses a relation to the beginning of the journey and
the whole universe. The quality of coherence thus includes outcomes and object
pairings which might seem opposed, since every connection forms an everlasting
part of the fold.
Elasticity
This quality captures the ongoing change in an information space, the twisting
and turning of information and connections, with one impulse following another.
With regard to thought processes, elasticity becomes apparent: Thoughts
sometimes stretch and flow unconsciously and casually, sometimes quickly and
targeted, but they are continuously changing their form and direction. The same
principle should be applied to visualization elements: Through their ability to
fold, individual elements and entire arrangements can assume multiple possible
manifestations, are flexible in their position and appearance, but never lose
the first principle of coherence. Elasticity thus describes a material quality
that is situated between fluidity and hardness, i.e., neither lacking coherence
nor being fully rigid.
Infinity
The fold surprises with its infinite possibilities; the outcomes of folding
operations appear to be unlimited. Smaller and smaller threads can be unfolded
in a visualization, or connections between elements can be found and followed
in a multitude of possible combinations. This does not imply that the actions
and events in information spaces are not also repeatable or retraceable, but
rather that folding operations are never final or completed. The same holds
true for the underlying datasets that may never be sufficiently comprehensive
to represent an artefact or collection. There are always further data
perspectives that could, in theory, be invoked for interpretation. The quality
of infinity is especially connected with the operation of complication and
reminds us that comprehensive information spaces might seem structured and
transparent at first glance, but are highly dependent on the perspective of the
viewer and a multitude of data dimensions. Because the fold offers
(potentially) infinite possibilities of twisting and turning, folding processes
remain unpredictable and serendipitous [Leong et al. 2011]
[Thudt et al. 2012]. If we accept the (partly) unpredictable folds of
large information spaces by learning to follow their implication, explication,
or complication, we can come to a deeper understanding of our own thought
processes and actions, and see the connectedness of every single point that
came before and comes after.
The Fold in Interactive Visualizations
In the context of information visualization, interactivity has been largely viewed
through the lens of users tasks and intents [Yi et al. 2007], distinctly
separate from the visual representation of data and animated transitions between
views. In Deleuze’s description of information processing lies an opportunity to
conceptualize visualizations in a novel framework that rejects the separation between
interactivity and visual encoding, just as the monad rejects the dualistic
distinction between body and soul. We aim at highlighting an encompassing practice of
visualization for the digital humanities, which have to find visual representations
for their collections and datasets, while on the other hand conceptualizing
interactivity with tasks as casual exploration or deep analysis in mind. While
various visualization techniques already refer to “folds” or “folding” in
their project descriptions or prototypes [e.g., Bach et al.
2016, Dörk et al. 2014, Riehmann et al. 2018, Zhao et
al. 2014], we will demonstrate that current visualization practice actually
provides a variety of interaction patterns that align with the principles of the fold
and can serve as an inspiration for digital humanities scholars. Accordingly, with
this research, we do not present new visualization techniques, but explore a new way
to conceptualize interactivity in data visualization.
Designing visualizations along the fold means to understand information spaces as
elastic, coherent, and potentially infinite systems. Instead of focusing on static
snapshots of visualizations, which would favor their visual encoding, the fold sheds
more light on the “in-between” states of folding processes, emphasizing the
transitions between visualization states as meaningful views that need to be
considered throughout the entire design process. In a design study, we have already
described this process by means of a book collection from the 19th century, focusing
on a set of functions which enable what we call “scalable
exploration”
[Bludau et al. 2020]. With this work, we want to widen the focus of the design
framework to questions of perception, interpretation, and critique with the help of
Deleuze’s philosophy. Data and the resulting representations in data visualization
can be seen as folds, reminding us that any perspective can only represent one
possible version of reality, while containing infinite other possibilities to
perceive a phenomenon. This is especially relevant for visualization practices in the
digital humanities, which aim at implementing inherently humanist research questions
into their visual interfaces and have spiked discussions on the problem that data are
never neutral [D’Ignazio and Klein 2020]
[Drucker 2011]
[Loukissas 2016].
This section presents examples of folding operations in data visualizations through
abstracted illustrations and will subsequently demonstrate how the fold’s qualities
can form the basis of a critical framework for their design and analysis. We
reference existing visualization examples, which have inspired us in the creation of
the illustrations and encourage readers to visit them to gain a deeper understanding
of the various mechanisms of the fold.
Figure 2.
Examples of explication (top to bottom) and implication (in reverse): a)
Exposing nested nodes in a network graph increases the detailed neighborhood of
the selected node. b) Stretching a selected area of a streamgraph in order to
increase detail leads to compression of the unselected areas. c) Selection of an
item in a tree graph unveils additional subbranches by providing new room through
compression of the remaining branches.Studying Visualizations through Fold Operations
Arguably, explication and implication as the first two operations of the fold are
common mechanisms in data visualizations, implementing the fold in the sense of
increasing or decreasing detail, aggregating or separating, clustering or
dispersing, etc. In particular, semantic zoom [Perlin and Fox 1993] already
supports the operations of the fold by allowing different degrees of granularity
while preserving the overall context. Figure 2
illustrates explication and implication for three typical visualization
techniques:
- a) An interactive mechanism common in network visualizations is selecting a node in a graph to trigger an explication, which “unfolds” into multiple sub-items and thus provides a more granular view on a selection [e.g., Morris 2018]. Network graphs like this are popular in the digital humanities, for instance when visualizing relationships between authors as in this visualization of Johann Wolfgang von Goethe’s social network: https://www.deutsche-biographie.de/graph?id=sfz53095 [Historische Kommission and Bayerische Staatsbibliothek 2010]. On the other side, implication describes the process of reducing a set of items into a collapsed item leading to the reduction of the overall visual complexity.
- b) The explication in a temporal streamgraph stretches an area of interest to display more detail, while compressing the rest of the visualization, similar to the mechanics of an accordion. Focus+Context like accordion drawing or a fish-eye technique is oftentimes used to provide a detailed view on a specific area of interest within a visualization while preserving its context [e.g., Baur et al. 2012, Cuenca et al. 2018, Morawa et al. 2014, Riehmann et al. 2018, Slack et al. 2005]. As one of the main focus of interest, timeline visualizations have been put into practice with this kind of compression technique, as in the “Touch the Time” project (https://www.uni-weimar.de/projekte/vr-scratch/videos/TTT.mp4) [Riehmann et al. 2018].
- c) The visualization of hierarchical data demonstrates a combination of the two previous mechanisms: Through selection of a tree branch, both the number of elements and the level of detail can be increased, while at the same time the branches that are not selected get compressed to provide sufficient space for the newly unfolded subbranches [e.g., Slack et al. 2005]. Relating to humanistic data, one case study is an expandable word tree that enables new ways of text exploration by giving the possibility to move along sequences of words through expansion and reduction of following or preceding words [Wattenberg and Viégas 2008]. Using such a word tree, it is, for instance, possible to gradually unfold all possible sentences that start with the name “Alice” in an interactive word tree version of the book Alice in Wonderland: https://www.jasondavies.com/wordtree/?source=alice-in-wonderland.txt [Davies n.d.]
Figure 3.
Examples of complication: a) Folding of a timeline based on similarity
between data points. b) Use of multidimensional reduction techniques in
combination with encoded glyphs for gradual addition of more dimensions in
two-dimensional displays. c) Switching between egocentric and noncentric total
states of a node-link network graph.In contrast to explication and implication, which correspond to established
interaction techniques, the operation of complication introduces a conceptual
approach to high-dimensional data visualization that is relatively seldom
considered. Dimensionality reductions and force-directed layouts can be
misleading, error-prone, or difficult to grasp, yet, the gradual build-up of a
multidimensional visualization can be viewed as a continuous complication (see
Figure 3):
- a) A linear timeline arranges events solely on the basis of their temporal succession (top). The gradual inclusion of additional event data constitutes a complication, in that further aspects are introduced that differentiate and relate the items (from middle to bottom): The straight line is folded into a curve that positions similar events closer together, using, for example, multidimensional scaling, as in the Time Curves technique (https://aviz.fr/~bbach/timecurves) [Bach et al. 2016].
- b) The two-dimensional visualization of a dataset as a scatterplot (top) can be gradually complicated by the introduction of flower-like glyphs encoding multiple dimensions per element [e.g., Kammer et al. 2018, Stefaner et al. 2014] and by similarity-based positioning. With sliders on the left, each dimension’s influence on the layout can be adjusted [e.g., Goldenberg 2017, Stefaner et al. 2014] (middle and bottom). As an example, such a similarity-based visualization of a country map, calculated through the t-SNE algorithm, lets the user choose between the various factors influencing the layout: https://projects.interacta.io/country-tsne [Rokotyan et al. 2019]]. Furthermore, this project offers a great example of disclosing its mechanisms through a narrative layer which leads visitors through the process under the title “Understanding the data”.
- c) An egocentric network centered around one node (top) can be a starting point [van Ham and Perer 2009] to gradually expand the analysis from a partial to a comprehensive perspective. The complication dissolves the egocentric perspective towards a full view of the network in which the layout is influenced by all nodes and all links become visible (bottom). Similarly, another common approach is the reversed switch from global to egocentric views [e.g., Ortiz 2013]. In the project “Six degrees of Francis Bacon” (http://www.sixdegreesoffrancisbacon.com) [Warren et al. n.d.], it is possible to change the view from a global, forced-directed network graph that is useful to see general patterns and the general network structure, to an egocentric view. Here, the related nodes are arranged on two rings around a selection, based on their degree of separation, making it easier to differentiate between direct and indirect relations.
Contrary to visualization techniques that separate dimensions into multiple
coordinated views or enforce an abrupt display change, complication suggests
traceable transitions between successive visualization states, which gradually
integrate additional data aspects into the same visualization. To think of
multidimensional data visualizations as dynamic processes of data complications
instead of a static image of reality can help identify the various factors
influencing the visual representation and make interactive functions more
comprehensible. For instance, a “complicated” timeline which positions
similar data points next to each other, forming a curve while allowing users to
follow the process of bending, sparks questions about the linearity of timelines
per se and the underlying structure and dimensions of the dataset.
Towards a Critical Framework
Considering the examples above, the fold’s operations help to identify the
interactive mechanisms of a visualization and examine their role in transforming
the appearance and arrangement of visual elements. Furthermore, the three
operations can be used to spot the lack of interactive capabilities or conceive
dynamic behaviors for visualizations being created. Here the fold does not only
offer principles for the design of and interactions with visualizations, but also
enables us to think about the potential and challenges of humanistic data.
Building on Deleuze’s writing and related visualization research [e.g., Elmqvist et al. 2011], we now formulate tentative
design principles and questions, thereby following the operations of the fold but
especially relating its newly defined qualities to the critical enquiry of data
visualizations.
Consistent Coupling
The fold’s coherence manifests itself in the deep contextualization and
connectedness of all elements. In order to realize this high degree of
coherence in interactive visualizations, the visual encoding and interactive
features need to be consistently coupled across all views. Coherence means, for
example, that one information point stands in relation to every other point
within the visualization, and the context of those relations is both visually
and interactively represented. For example, in cultural heritage collections,
artifacts might be related to each other through many different explicit (e.g.,
same author) or implicit (e.g., sharing a subject) relations over a multitude
of possible data dimensions (e.g., attributes, visual similarity, temporal
sequences). Integration of coherence in visualization is not only dependent on
abstract relations but mainly visible in the form of visual cues and linkages
that reveal how elements are connected and invite the viewer to follow
them.
Question 1: How are the connections between data elements,
visual encodings, and interactive features exposed?
Furthermore, the quality of coherence is particularly promoted by consistent
design decisions across the entire visualization, regardless of its dynamic
state. As a person interacts with the visualization, the coupling of visual
representation and interactivity consistently holds. Similarly, the behaviors
of interaction techniques function consistently across all views. Visual
variables, such as color, shape or position, that are added to encode
additional dimensions should not stand in conflict with existing encodings.
Humanities scholars conceptualizing visualizations should therefore pay
attention to different states of the visualization (e.g., overview – detail),
which interactive functions can be used at which states, and watch out for the
application of them throughout a visitor’s journey – for instance when applying
filters to a dataset and changing to a different zoom position afterwards.
Question 2: How consistent are visual encodings and
interactive techniques across all views, throughout multiple continuous
states?
When reducing many points into a single point, elements should not be removed,
but be folded while preserving the respective relation to the remaining
elements. The implication or explication does not only influence a discrete
element but also has an effect on the whole visualization, indicating the
overall coherence of the information space. When visual features are reduced or
when elements are collapsed, the design of the respective transitions should be
meaningful and consistent. Similarly, elements being added should appear from
logical positions in the interface.
Question 3: Do the arrival and departure of elements in the
display convey the concept of object permanence?
Constrained Fluidity
A high degree of elasticity means that elements are flexibly embedded into a
complex visual appearance and arrangement and that they are able to change
their shape and leave their position to appear elsewhere. They are not static
and can show themselves anew repeatedly – and, also in unforeseen
representations. For example, objects in visualizations of cultural collections
can have multiple relations to each other but are often assigned a static
position in web-based interfaces. Instead, it could be helpful to include
flexible positions and to consider a range of visual representations, moving
between abstract shapes to more concrete images of an object. However, the fold
is neither erratic nor random. The changes carried out through folding
operations should be comprehensible and meaningful.
Question 4: To which degree are fluidity and rigidness
balanced so that the elements and arrangements accommodate all possible
values and relations in a dataset?
The spectrum of dynamic changes to individual elements and entire arrangements
needs to be carefully considered. To do this it is paramount to view visual
encodings not as static mappings between data dimensions and visual variables,
but as complex sequences modulated by the fold’s operations. Accordingly, like
a blooming flower, the additional data dimensions in Figure 3 b) are already comprised in the data points and their
revelation demonstrates their elasticity.
Question 5: Are the elements and arrangements designed with
regard to their dynamic behaviors, i.e., their intermediate states?
Humanistic data is oftentimes shaped by various forms of uncertainty,
subjectivity, and ambiguity [Drucker 2011]. Nevertheless, since
such data properties are difficult to address in visualizations [Hullman 2019] and might significantly increase complexity, they
are oftentimes omitted completely in visualizations. The elasticity of elements
might help to reveal such data properties through folding operations on demand
for specific elements. Thus it is possible to critically analyze the datasets
beforehand, but even more so during the visualization process. It should be
tested whether a visualization shows what researchers expected to see from the
dataset or whether it can reveal new qualities in the data through new views
and interactive functions.
Question 6: Does the representation of the data through the
visualization constrain interpretive qualities of the data, such as
uncertainty or ambiguity, that could be dissolved through interactivity and
elasticity of the encoding?
Linked Perspectives
The quality of infinity relates to a multitude of possible representations of
data, the insights they may evoke, and circular or open-ended navigation
mechanisms. Specific combinations of visual form and interactive functionality
in a visualization can evoke new, surprising, and inspiring expressions of a
dataset and a variety of possibly unexpected insights, surprises, and
serendipitous discoveries. The quality of infinity can be observed, for
example, in Figure 3 b) through the seemingly
infinite combination possibilities within the weightings of the multiple
dimensions.
Question 7: Do all visual elements in the interface afford
interactivity to transform the view and generate new insights?
An interactive visualization is never complete, but always in progress. If a
data visualization could be thought of as a densely connected network of linked
perspectives, at any given point in the network of possible visualization
states, users ideally should never be led to dead-ends. For instance, unfolding
detail in Figure 2 b) and c) will always lead to
an impression of other information while preserving the context and therefore
allowing for open-ended interactions without the need to resort to the
browser’s back-button.
Question 8: How is the incompleteness of views embraced and
endless traversal of the data encouraged?
Discussion
Arguably, a lot of thought during the design process goes into the visual
representation of a visualization, i.e., the mapping from various data dimensions to
a limited number of visual variables, whereas interaction techniques and animated
transitions are oftentimes only an afterthought, sometimes even used as a last fix to
solve issues of a visual encoding. Similarly, the interpretation of data
visualizations is almost exclusively focused on the visual representation – the rules
of turning data qualities into graphical elements – often disregarding the dynamic
interplay between display parameters and interactive capabilities. With the fold we
put forward an approach that emphasizes a need for simultaneous and coordinated
consideration of interaction and representation in data visualization. In the
process, we identified the connections between visual encoding and interactivity as
crucial for the implementation of the folding operations and emphasized them in the
critical framework, arguing for a close consideration of visual appearance and its
dynamic behavior.
However, prototyping interfaces may in parts still be restricted by static forms of
prototyping techniques, a lack of suitable tools, or a massive amount of data.
Additionally, thinking of representation and interaction in all states of a
visualization in unison with the intention to achieve meaningful transitions may turn
out to demand significant conceptual, technical, and intellectual effort. While
realistically seeing the complexity that the fold brings to visualization practice in
the digital humanities, we believe that its notion can have a profound effect on the
way we think about data, and even in its smallest implementation can contribute to
more profound and purposeful visualizations.
Proposing the use of the fold and its operations to approach a gap in the development
of data visualization, we recommend the consideration of the qualities coherence,
elasticity, and infinity as fruitful starting points for both creation and critique.
Nevertheless, these qualities only describe an ideal environment for the fold. In
practice, their degree of implementation might always be partially limited. While we
have provided a first framework for their implementation in digital humanities
projects and research, we are aware that the applied methods are highly dependent on
the actual data and project setting. Furthermore, the interpretation of data
visualization remains deeply subjective. Especially machine-generated arrangements,
for instance, based on similarity, might need a high amount of testing and editing,
or even a narrative layer, to arrive at comprehensible, yet “complicated”
visualizations in the sense of the fold. Additionally, we would like to see more
research into the perception and necessities of different user groups in digital
humanities visualizations.
Although this research mainly focused on the implementation of the fold through a new
perspective on the design and interpretation of visualizations, we also see the
potential of the fold when it comes to their very foundation: data. Thinking of
Deleuze’s infinite folds, the common approach to data as “given”
[Drucker 2011], implicitly perceived as objective and fixed, could also
be understood as one folded impression of reality. We believe that the fold offers a
unique perspective for digital humanities scholars to translate their datasets into
interactive visualizations along various meaningful views, which can generate new
insights for their research and help them in conveying it to the public. This
perspective becomes especially relevant if we take a look at more recent developments
concerning critical perspectives on the power and rhetoric of data and their
visualization [D’Ignazio and Klein 2020]
[Dörk et al. 2013]
[Hullman and Diakopoulos 2011]. Here, we are specifically calling for a close
consideration of theoretical concepts and a practical collaboration between data
visualization research and the digital humanities to rethink the relationship between
representation and interactivity in data visualization.
Conclusion
As data visualization continues to expand its relevance in the digital humanities,
there is a growing need to come to terms with interactivity as one of its most
fundamental aspects. While the challenges of cultural heritage data and the
complexity of their implementation into dynamic visualizations has gained critical
attention, the prospects of interaction techniques to this end are not discussed as
intensely. With this research, we proposed the notion of the fold as a productive way
to jointly consider interaction and encoding in data visualization. While generally
understood as an essential component of data visualization, interactivity is often
treated in separation from the visual encoding and as a second step in the design
process, when all decisions about the visual variables have already been made. This
relegation of interactivity is perpetuated in the critical interpretation of data
visualization that is similarly focused on the visual encoding and lacks the
vocabulary to make sense of the provided interactive capabilities. Drawing from
Deleuze’s writing on the fold, we formulated a critical framework for interactive
data visualization consisting of operations, qualities, and questions for their
design and interpretation. In this context, we do not only hope to encourage
consideration of folding operations for the visualization of data, but especially see
the importance of understanding information spaces and the data themselves as a
manifold space. In order to treat interfaces as subject to critique and
interpretation [Drucker 2011]
[Sengers and Gaver 2006], the lens of the fold provides a useful thinking tool
for a humanistic approach to data visualization.
To investigate the viability of the fold for the critical consideration of existing
visualizations, we abstracted new, explanatory illustrations from various
visualization examples. It was our aim to examine in which functions the fold was
already manifested in data visualization practice. During this process, we noticed
that a considerable number of the visualization techniques exhibited the
characteristics of the fold, while certain aspects are still underdeveloped and could
be explored in future research and design. While the pair of implication and
explication can be seen in numerous visualization examples, we see a necessity and,
through the notion of the fold, an opportunity for designing visualizations that
offer insightful complications, more specifically through meaningful transitions.
This is particularly important when visualizing digital cultural heritage data, where
multidimensional and multifaceted collections or datasets offer intriguing
opportunities for the joint design of interactive exploration and visual
representation. Based on the operations and qualities of the fold, we have formulated
a critical framework as an invitation to jointly consider the interactive
capabilities and visual representations of data in visualization techniques in the
digital humanities. Coherence, elasticity, and infinity are valuable qualities for
the design of interactive visualizations that can trigger unexpected and surprising
insights – the raison d’être of data visualization.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Linda Freyberg, Sascha Freyberg, Rabea Kleymann, Francesca
Morini, Arran Ridley, Jonas Rogge, and Fidel Thomet for their comments, advice, and
feedback along the way. Furthermore, many thanks to the reviewers of Digital Humanities Quarterly for their valuable feedback and
thoughtful suggestions. Special thanks to Bruno Latour for the personal encouragement
to peruse Deleuze's writing on monads and folds.
Works Cited
Bach et al. 2016 Bach, Benjamin, Conglei Shi, Nicolas
Heulot, Tara Madhyastha, Tom Grabowski, and Pierre Dragicevic. “Time Curves: Folding Time to Visualize Patterns of Temporal Evolution in
Data”. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer
Graphics, vol. 22, no. 1, 2016, pp. 559–68.
Baur et al. 2012 Baur, Dominikus, Bongshin Lee, and
Sheelagh Carpendale. “TouchWave: Kinetic Multi-touch Manipulation
for Hierarchical Stacked Graphs”. Proceedings of the
2012 ACM International Conference on Interactive Tabletops and Surfaces,
ACM, 2012, pp. 255–64.
Bederson and Boltman 2003 Bederson, Benjamin B., and
Angela Boltman. “Does Animation Help Users Build Mental Maps of
Spatial Information?”
The Craft of Information Visualization: Readings and
Reflections, edited by Benjamin B. Bederson and Ben Shneiderman, Morgan
Kaufmann, 2003, pp. 87–94.
Bertin 1983 Bertin, Jacques. Semiology of Graphics: Diagrams, Networks, Maps, University of Wisconsin
Press, 1983.
Bludau et al. 2020 Bludau, Mark-Jan, Viktoria
Brüggemann, Anna Busch, and Marian Dörk. “Reading Traces:
Scalable Exploration in Elastic Visualizations of Cultural Heritage Data”.
Computer Graphics Forum, vol. 39, no.3, 2020, pp. 77–87. https://diglib.eg.org/bitstream/handle/10.1111/cgf13964/v39i3pp077-087.pdf.
Bredekamp 1988 Bredekamp, Horst. “Leibniz’ Gewebe: Strumpfband, Falte, Leinwand”. Die Logik der Bilder, edited by Michael Töteberg and Wim
Wenders, Verl. d. Autoren, 1988, pp. 233–38.
Card et al. 1999 Card, Stuart K., Jock D. Mackinlay, and
Ben Shneiderman. Using Vision to Think, Kaufmann
Publishers Inc., 1999.
Carpendale 2003 Carpendale, Sheelagh. Considering Visual Variables as a Basis for Information
Visualisation, Department of Computer science, University of Calgary,
2003.
Chevalier et al. 2014 Chevalier, Fanny, Pierre
Dragicevic, and Steven Franconeri. “The Not-so-Staggering Effect
of Staggered Animations on Visual Tracking”. IEEE
Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, vol. 20, no. 12,
2014, pp. 2241–50.
Chevalier et al. 2016 Chevalier, Fanny, Nathalie
Henry Riche, Catherine Plaisant, Amira Chalbi, and Christophe Hurter. “Animations 25 Years Later: New Roles and Opportunities”.
Proceedings of the International Working Conference on
Advanced Visual Interfaces. ACM, 2016, pp. 280–87.
Colebrook 2002 Colebrook, Claire. Gilles Deleuze, Routledge Critical Thinkers, 2002.
Csikszentmihalyi 1990 Csikszentmihalyi,
Mihaly. Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience,
HarperPerennial, 1990.
Cuenca et al. 2018 Cuenca, Erick, Arnaud Sallaberry,
Florence Y. Wang, and Pascal Poncelet. “Multistream: A
Multiresolution Streamgraph Approach to Explore Hierarchical Time Series”.
IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer
Graphics, vol. 24, no. 12, 2018, pp. 3160–3173.
Davies n.d. Davies, Jason. “Word
Tree”, [online], n.d. Accessed 12 Jun. 2020. https://www.jasondavies.com/wordtree/.
Deleuze 2006 Deleuze, Gilles. The Fold: Leibniz and the Baroque, translated by Tom Conley, Continuum,
2006.
Drucker 2011 Drucker, Johanna. “Humanities Approaches to Graphical Display”. Digital Humanities Quarterly,
vol. 5, no. 1, 2011. http://www.digitalhumanities.org/dhq/vol/5/1/000091/000091.html.
Drucker 2013 Drucker, Johanna. “Performative Materiality and Theoretical Approaches to Interface”. Digital Humanities Quarterly, vol. 7, no. 1, 2013. http://www.digitalhumanities.org/dhq/vol/7/1/000143/000143.html.
Dörk et al. 2011 Dörk, Marian, Sheelagh Carpendale, and
Carey Williamson. “The Information Flaneur: A Fresh Look at
Information Seeking”. Proceedings of the SIGCHI
Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 2011, pp.
1215–24.
Dörk et al. 2013 Dörk, Marian, Patrick Feng, Christopher
Collins, and Sheelagh Carpendale. “Critical InfoVis: Exploring
the Politics of Visualization”. alt.chi 2013: Extended
Abstracts of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems.
ACM, 2013, pp. 2189–98.
Dörk et al. 2014 Dörk, Marian, Rob Comber, and Martyn
Dade-Robertson. “Monadic Exploration: Seeing the Whole Through
Its Parts”. Proceedings of the 32nd Annual ACM
Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 2014, pp.
1535–44.
D’Ignazio and Klein 2016 D’Ignazio, Catherine, and
Lauren F. Klein. “Feminist Data Visualization”. VIS4DH: Workshop on Visualization for the Digital
Humanities, 2016.
D’Ignazio and Klein 2020 D’Ignazio, Catherine, and
Lauren F. Klein. Data Feminism, MIT Press, 2020.
Elmqvist et al. 2011 Elmqvist, Niklas, Andrew Vande
Moere, Hans-Christian Jetter, Daniel Cernea, Harald Reiterer, and T. J. Jankun-Kelly.
“Fluid Interaction for Information Visualization”.
Information Visualization, vol. 10, no. 4, 2011, pp.
327–40.
Freitas 2016 Freitas, Elizabeth de. “The New Empiricism of the Fractal Fold”. Cultural Studies ↔ Critical Methodologies, vol. 16, no. 2, 2016, pp.
224–34.
Gandillac 1953 Gandillac, Maurice de. Nikolaus von Cues: Studien zu seiner Philosophie und philosophischen
Weltanschauung, Schwann, 1953.
Gleicher 2018 Gleicher, Michael. “Considerations for Visualizing Comparison”. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics,
vol. 24, no. 1, 2018, pp. 413–23.
Goldenberg 2017 Goldenberg, Russell. “Craft Beer – So Hot Right now. But what City is the Microbrew
Capital of the US?”, [online], 2017, accessed 10 Jun. 2020. https://pudding.cool/2017/04/beer/.
Heer and Robertson 2007 Heer, Jeffrey, and George G.
Robertson. “Animated Transitions in Statistical Data
Graphics”. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and
Computer Graphics, vol. 13, no. 6, 2007, pp. 1240–47.
Hepworth and Church 2018 Hepworth, Katherine, and
Christopher Church. “Racism in the Machine: Visualization Ethics
in Digital Humanities Projects”. Digital Humanities
Quarterly, vol. 12, no. 4, 2018. http://www.digitalhumanities.org/dhq/vol/12/4/000408/000408.html.
Historische Kommission and Bayerische Staatsbibliothek 2010 Historische
Kommission and Bayerische Staatsbibliothek. “Deutsche
Biographie”, [online], 2010, accessed 22 May 2020. https://www.deutsche-biographie.de.
Hullman 2019 Hullman, Jessica. “Why Authors Don't Visualize Uncertainty”. IEEE
Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, vol. 26, no. 1, 2019,
pp.133–39.
Hullman and Diakopoulos 2011 Hullman, Jessica, and
Nick Diakopoulos. “Visualization Rhetoric: Framing Effects in
Narrative Visualization”. IEEE Transactions on
Visualization and Computer Graphics, vol. 17, no. 12, 2011, pp.
2231–40.
Kammer et al. 2018 Kammer, Dietrich, Mandy Keck,
Thomas Gründer, and Rainer Groh. “Big Data Landscapes: Improving
the Visualization of Machine Learning-based Clustering Algorithms”. Proceedings of the 2018 International Conference on Advanced Visual
Interfaces. ACM, 2018, p. 66.
Kreiseler et al. 2017 Kreiseler, Sarah, Viktoria
Brüggemann, and Marian Dörk. “Tracing Exploratory Modes in
Digital Collections of Museum Web Sites Using Reverse Information
Architecture”. First Monday, vol. 22, no. 4, 2017. https://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/6984/6090.
Laerke 2010 Laerke, Mogens. “Four
Things Deleuze Learned from Leibniz”. Deleuze and the
Fold, edited by Sjoerd van Tuinen and Niamh McDonnell, Palgrave Macmillan,
2010, pp. 25–45.
Latour et al. 2012 Latour, Bruno, Pablo Jensen,
Tommaso Venturini, Sébastian Grauwin, and Dominique Bouiller. “The Whole is Always Smaller than its Parts ‐ a Digital Test of Gabriel Tardes'
Monads”. British Journal of Sociology, vol.
63, no. 4, 2012, pp. 590–615.
Leibniz 1898 Leibniz, Gottfried. Monadology, translated by Robert Latta, Clarendon Press, 1898.
Leong et al. 2011 Leong, Tuck Wah, Richard Harper, and
Tim Regan. “Nudging towards Serendipity: A Case with Personal
Digital Photos”. Proceedings of the 25th BCS
Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. British Computer Society, 2011,
pp. 385–94.
Loukissas 2016 Loukissas, Yanni Alexander. “Taking Big Data apart: Local Readings of Composite Media
Collections”. Information, Communication &
Society, vol. 20, no. 5, 2016, pp. 651–664.
Morawa et al. 2014 Morawa, Robert, Tom Horak, Ulrike
Kister, Annett Mitschick, and Raimund Dachselt. “Combining
Timeline and Graph Visualization”. Proceedings of the
Ninth ACM International Conference on Interactive Tabletops and Surfaces,
ACM, 2014, pp. 345–50.
Morris 2018 Morris, Jeff. “Introducing Neo4j Bloom: Graph Data Visualization for Everyone”, [online],
2018, accessed 12 Jun. 2020. https://neo4j.com/blog/introducing-neo4j-bloom-graph-data-visualization-for-everyone/.
Ortiz 2013 Ortiz, Santiago. “Newk -
Twitter Conversations”, [online], 2013, accessed 22 May 2020. http://moebio.com/newk/twitter.
Pace 2004 Pace, Steven. “A Grounded
Theory of the Flow Experiences of Web Users”. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, vol. 60, no. 3, 2004,
pp. 327–63.
Parry 2019 Parry, Kyle. “Reading
for Enactment: A Performative Approach to Digital Scholarship and Data
Visualization”. Debates in the Digital
Humanities, edited by Matthew K. Gold and Lauren F. Klein, University of
Minnesota Press, 2019. https://dhdebates.gc.cuny.edu/read/untitled-f2acf72c-a469-49d8-be35-67f9ac1e3a60/section/bd5a43c1-bbfe-4c5c-8c0d-c3db1776eb99#ch13.
Perlin and Fox 1993 Perlin, Ken, and David Fox. “Pad: An Alternative Approach to the Computer Interface”.
SIGGRAPH '93: Proceedings of the 20th annual conference on
Computer graphics and interactive techniques. ACM, 1993, pp. 57–64.
Riehmann et al. 2018 Riehmann, Patrick, Joshua
Reibert, Jens Opolka, and Bernd Froehlich. “Touch the Time:
Touch-Centered Interaction Paradigms for Time-Oriented Data”. EuroVis 2018 - Short Papers, edited by Jimmy Johansson et
al., The Eurographics Association, 2018, pp. 113–17.
Risam 2015 Risam, Roopika. “Beyond
the Margins: Intersectionality and the Digital Humanities”. Digital Humanities Quarterly, vol. 9, no. 2, 2015. http://digitalhumanities.org:8081/dhq/vol/9/2/000208/000208.html.
Rokotyan et al. 2019 Rokotyan, Nikita, Olya Stukova,
and Dasha Kolmakova. “An Alternative Data-Driven Country
Map”, [online], 2019, accessed 22 May 2020. https://projects.interacta.io/country-tsne.
Sacha et al. 2017 Sacha, Dominik, Leishi Zhang, Michael
Sedlmair, John A. Lee, Jaakko Peltonen, Daniel Weiskopf, Stephen C. North, and Daniel
A. Keim. “Visual Interaction with Dimensionality Reduction: A
Structured Literature Analysis”. IEEE Transactions on
Visualization and Computer Graphics, vol. 23, no. 1, 2017, pp.
241–50.
Sengers and Gaver 2006 Sengers, Phoebe, and Bill
Gaver. “Staying Open to Interpretation: Engaging Multiple
Meanings in Design and Evaluation”. DIS '06:
Proceedings of the Conference on Designing Interactive Systems. ACM, 2006,
pp. 99–108.
Shneiderman 1983 Shneiderman, Ben. “Direct Manipulation. A Step Beyond Programming Languages”.
IEEE Transactions on Computers, vol. 16, no. 8, 1983,
pp. 57–69.
Shneiderman 1996 Shneiderman, Ben. “The Eyes Have It: A Task by Data Type Taxonomy for Information
Visualizations”. Proceedings / IEEE Symposium on
Visual Languages, Sep. 3 - 6, 1996, Boulder, Colorado. IEEE Computer
Society Press, 1996, pp. 336–43.
Slack et al. 2005 Slack, James, Kristian Hildebrand,
and Tamara Munzner. “PRISAD: A Partitioned Rendering
Infrastructure for Scalable Accordion Drawing”. IEEE
Symposium on Information Visualization, 2005, pp. 41–48.
Stahnke et al. 2016 Stahnke, Julian, Marian Dörk,
Boris Müller, and Andreas Thom. “Probing Projections: Interaction
Techniques for Interpreting Arrangements and Errors of Dimensionality
Reductions”. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and
Computer Graphics, vol. 22, no. 1, 2016, pp. 629–38.
Stefaner et al. 2014 Stefaner, Moritz, Frank Rausch,
Jonas Leist, Marcus Paeschke, Dominikus Baur, Timm Kekeritz. “OECDBetterLifeIndex.org”, [online], 2014, accessed 12 Jun. 2020. http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/.
Thudt et al. 2012 Thudt, Alice, Uta Hinrichs, and
Sheelagh Carpendale. “The Bohemian Bookshelf”. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing
Systems, edited by Joseph A. Konstan. ACM, 2012, p. 1461.
Tversky et al. 2002 Tversky, Barbara, Julie B.
Morrison, and Mireille Betrancourt. “Animation: Can it
Facilitate?”
Human Computer Studies, vol. 57, no. 4, 2002, pp.
247–62.
Wagner 1995 Wagner, Thomas. “Die
Falten des Geistes: Barock werden mit Gilles Deleuze”. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, vol. 1995, Nr. 283, 5 Dec. 1995.
Warren et al. n.d. Warren, Christopher, Daniel Shore,
Jessica Otis, Scott Weingart, and John Ladd. “Six Degrees of
Francis Bacon”, [online], n.d, accessed 22 May 2020. http://www.sixdegreesoffrancisbacon.com
Wattenberg and Viégas 2008 Wattenberg, Martin, and
Fernanda Viégas. “The Word Tree, an Interactive Visual
Concordance”. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and
Computer Graphics, vol. 14, no. 6, 2008, pp. 1221–1228.
Wattenberg et al. 2016 Wattenberg, Martin,
Fernanda Viégas, and Ian Johnson. “How to Use t-SNE
Effectively”. Distill, 2016. https://distill.pub/2016/misread-tsne/.
Whitelaw 2015 Whitelaw, Mitchell. “Generous Interfaces for Digital Cultural Collections”. Digital Humanities Quarterly, vol. 9, no. 1, 2015. http://www.digitalhumanities.org/dhq/vol/9/1/000205/000205.html.
Windhager et al. 2018 Windhager, Florian, Paolo
Federico, Günther Schreder, Katrin Glinka, Marian Dörk, Silvia Miksch, and Eva Mayr.
“Visualization of Cultural Heritage Collection Data: State of
the Art and Future Challenges”. IEEE Transactions on
Visualization and Computer Graphics, 2018, pp. 2311–2330.
Windhager et al. 2019 Windhager, Florian, Saminu
Salisu, Günther Schreder, and Eva Mayr. “Uncertainty of What and
for Whom - And Does Anyone Care? Propositions for Cultural Collection
Visualization”. 4th IEEE Workshop on Visualization for
the Digital Humanities (VIS4DH), 2019.
Woods 1984 Woods, Daniel D. “Visual
Momentum: A Concept to Improve the Cognitive Coupling of Person and
Computer”. International Journal of Man-Machine
Studies, vol. 21, no. 3, 1984, pp. 229–44.
Yi et al. 2007 Yi, Ji Soo, Youn ah Kang, John T. Stasko,
and Julie A. Jacko. “Toward a Deeper Understanding of the Role of
Interaction in Information Visualization”. IEEE
Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, vol. 13, no. 6, pp.
1224–1231.
Zhao et al. 2014 Zhao, Jian, Nan Cao, Zhen Wen, Yale
Song, Yu-ru Lin, and Christopher Collins. “#FluxFlow: Visual
Analysis of Anomalous Information Spreading on Social Media”. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics,
vol. 20, no. 12, 2014, pp. 1773–82.
van Ham and Perer 2009 van Ham, Frank, and Adam Perer.
“‘Search, Show Context, Expand on Demand’: Supporting
Large Graph Exploration with Degree-of-Interest”. IEEE
Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, vol. 15, no. 6, 2009,
pp. 953–60.
URL: http://www.digitalhumanities.org/dhq/vol/14/3/000487/000487.html
Comments: dhqinfo@digitalhumanities.org
Published by: The Alliance of Digital Humanities Organizations and The Association for Computers and the Humanities
Affiliated with: Digital Scholarship in the Humanities
DHQ has been made possible in part by the National Endowment for the Humanities.
Copyright © 2005 -
Unless otherwise noted, the DHQ web site and all DHQ published content are published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. Individual articles may carry a more permissive license, as described in the footer for the individual article, and in the article’s metadata.
Comments: dhqinfo@digitalhumanities.org
Published by: The Alliance of Digital Humanities Organizations and The Association for Computers and the Humanities
Affiliated with: Digital Scholarship in the Humanities
DHQ has been made possible in part by the National Endowment for the Humanities.
Copyright © 2005 -
Unless otherwise noted, the DHQ web site and all DHQ published content are published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. Individual articles may carry a more permissive license, as described in the footer for the individual article, and in the article’s metadata.
