Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Where to go with yoursubject?!Anne Everars, Greet Robijns en Ward Coolswoensdag 22 mei 13
ContentIntroductionDesign choicesPaper prototypeDigital prototypeExpert evaluationEvaluation digital prototypeWhat we lear...
ContentIntroductionWhat? Why? How?Design choicesPaper prototypeDigital prototypeExpert evaluationEvaluation digital protot...
What to visualize?Difference between LAK and EDM dataLocalization of the subjectsDifferences between participatinguniversi...
Why this?Interesting to know where people arewriting about a certain subjectLAK and EDM have a comparable researchdomain➠ ...
How did we do this?BeginningSimple map with markerfor the associationsmap with EDM versusLAK datawoensdag 22 mei 13
How did we do this?Rapid prototypingPaper prototypeFirst digital versionExpert evaluationSecond digital versionEvaluation ...
ContentIntroductionDesign choicesPaper prototypeDigital prototypeExpert evaluationEvaluation digital prototypeWhat we lear...
Design choicesConflict:Visualize the quantity of paperse.g. in the US more publications than inGuatemalaVisualize distribut...
Design choicesContinue working with bar chartsMarkers are too close togetherBar can get really longNot clear to which asso...
Design choicesPie chartLocated at the centerof the associationUnreadable whenzoomed out or manyassociations close together...
Design choicesPop-upsClear to whichassociation it belongsMap not flooded with- potentially unwanted -informationSmall marke...
Design choiceswoensdag 22 mei 13
Pop-ups?Visualize information about one associationVisualize differences between twoassociations2 options were evaluated b...
ContentIntroductionDesign choicesPaper prototypeDigital prototypeExpert evaluationEvaluation digital prototypeWhat we lear...
Paper prototypewoensdag 22 mei 13
Paper prototypewoensdag 22 mei 13
Paper prototypewoensdag 22 mei 13
Paper prototypewoensdag 22 mei 13
Paper prototypewoensdag 22 mei 13
Paper prototypewoensdag 22 mei 13
Paper prototypewoensdag 22 mei 13
Paper prototypewoensdag 22 mei 13
Paper prototypewoensdag 22 mei 13
Paper prototypethe compare issuewoensdag 22 mei 13
EvaluationSome remarks during user test‘Compare’ and ‘Search’ button are placedtoo close together.Dots in the map might be...
EvaluationSUS-questionnaire➠ express the quality with a number➠ get a view of the usability of theapplicationSUS-score = 7...
ContentIntroductionDesign choicesPaper prototypeDigital prototypeExpert evaluationEvaluation digital prototypeWhat we lear...
ChangesScale : no continuous colors, but discrete➠ beter visualize the differencesLocation of search and compare button ar...
Digital prototypewoensdag 22 mei 13
Digital prototypewoensdag 22 mei 13
Digital prototypewoensdag 22 mei 13
Digital prototypewoensdag 22 mei 13
Digital prototypewoensdag 22 mei 13
Digital prototypewoensdag 22 mei 13
Digital prototypewoensdag 22 mei 13
Digital prototypewoensdag 22 mei 13
Digital prototypewoensdag 22 mei 13
Remarks from class0 papers graph not clearColor scale not clear➠ continuous scale is better than 5 colorswoensdag 22 mei 13
ContentIntroductionDesign choicesPaper prototypeDigital prototypeExpert evaluationEvaluation digital prototypeWhat we lear...
Expert evaluationTransparency adds too much complexity tothe overview map➠ chose what to visualize (switched view?)Small m...
ChangesAdded radiobuttonsTwo levels :- quantity- conferenceNo moretransparencyOverview mapwoensdag 22 mei 13
ContentIntroductionDesign choicesPaper prototypeDigital prototypeExpert evaluationEvaluation digital prototypeWhat we lear...
Evaluation - remarksRadio buttons difficult to seeHard to click the ‘compare city’ button➠ caused by the computerGraphs : u...
EvaluationSUS-score = 65.6woensdag 22 mei 13
ContentIntroductionDesign choicesPaper prototypeDigital prototypeExpert evaluationEvaluation digital prototypeWhat we lear...
What we learnedSome associations have a strong preferencefor one of the conferences‘learning’ gives a divided imageLearnin...
What we learnedSome associations have a strong preferencefor one of the conferences‘learning’ gives a divided imageLearnin...
What we learnedImportant to get an idea about the dataImportant to get an idea about what whatpeople want to know about th...
ContentIntroductionDesign choicesPaper prototypeDigital prototypeExpert evaluationEvaluation digital prototypeWhat we lear...
Teamwork?First meeting to look at what we wanted andhow we wanted to do visualize itDivided the tasksEveryone did their pa...
ContentIntroductionDesign choicesPaper prototypeDigital prototypeExpert evaluationEvaluation digital prototypeWhat we lear...
Technical issues?Clash between markers and pop-upsLocation of universitiesNaming of universitye.g. Katholieke Universiteit...
ContentIntroductionDesign choicesPaper prototypeDigital prototypeExpert evaluationEvaluation digital prototypeWhat we lear...
Future workWhite-space in compare boxesMore information about a paper oruniversityEvaluation over timeSearch option when s...
DEMOwoensdag 22 mei 13
woensdag 22 mei 13
?Questions?woensdag 22 mei 13
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Presentation Capita Selecta CHI - final

220

Published on

Final presentatie for the project for the course of Capita Selecta CHI at the KULeuven

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
220
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Transcript of "Presentation Capita Selecta CHI - final"

  1. 1. Where to go with yoursubject?!Anne Everars, Greet Robijns en Ward Coolswoensdag 22 mei 13
  2. 2. ContentIntroductionDesign choicesPaper prototypeDigital prototypeExpert evaluationEvaluation digital prototypeWhat we learnedTeamworkTechnical issuesFuture workwoensdag 22 mei 13
  3. 3. ContentIntroductionWhat? Why? How?Design choicesPaper prototypeDigital prototypeExpert evaluationEvaluation digital prototypeWhat we learnedTeamworkTechnical issuesFuture workwoensdag 22 mei 13
  4. 4. What to visualize?Difference between LAK and EDM dataLocalization of the subjectsDifferences between participatinguniversities (number of written papers)woensdag 22 mei 13
  5. 5. Why this?Interesting to know where people arewriting about a certain subjectLAK and EDM have a comparable researchdomain➠ visualize the differencesQuantity is also visualized, to see where alot of research is done about a subjectwoensdag 22 mei 13
  6. 6. How did we do this?BeginningSimple map with markerfor the associationsmap with EDM versusLAK datawoensdag 22 mei 13
  7. 7. How did we do this?Rapid prototypingPaper prototypeFirst digital versionExpert evaluationSecond digital versionEvaluation digital versionwoensdag 22 mei 13
  8. 8. ContentIntroductionDesign choicesPaper prototypeDigital prototypeExpert evaluationEvaluation digital prototypeWhat we learnedTeamworkTechnical issuesFuture workwoensdag 22 mei 13
  9. 9. Design choicesConflict:Visualize the quantity of paperse.g. in the US more publications than inGuatemalaVisualize distribution between LAK andEDMwoensdag 22 mei 13
  10. 10. Design choicesContinue working with bar chartsMarkers are too close togetherBar can get really longNot clear to which association it belongswoensdag 22 mei 13
  11. 11. Design choicesPie chartLocated at the centerof the associationUnreadable whenzoomed out or manyassociations close togetherHard to compare associations (number ofpapers not clear)woensdag 22 mei 13
  12. 12. Design choicesPop-upsClear to whichassociation it belongsMap not flooded with- potentially unwanted -informationSmall markers on the map itselfHover over associationto see the nameColored countrieswoensdag 22 mei 13
  13. 13. Design choiceswoensdag 22 mei 13
  14. 14. Pop-ups?Visualize information about one associationVisualize differences between twoassociations2 options were evaluated by use of paperprototypewoensdag 22 mei 13
  15. 15. ContentIntroductionDesign choicesPaper prototypeDigital prototypeExpert evaluationEvaluation digital prototypeWhat we learnedTeamworkTechnical issuesFuture workwoensdag 22 mei 13
  16. 16. Paper prototypewoensdag 22 mei 13
  17. 17. Paper prototypewoensdag 22 mei 13
  18. 18. Paper prototypewoensdag 22 mei 13
  19. 19. Paper prototypewoensdag 22 mei 13
  20. 20. Paper prototypewoensdag 22 mei 13
  21. 21. Paper prototypewoensdag 22 mei 13
  22. 22. Paper prototypewoensdag 22 mei 13
  23. 23. Paper prototypewoensdag 22 mei 13
  24. 24. Paper prototypewoensdag 22 mei 13
  25. 25. Paper prototypethe compare issuewoensdag 22 mei 13
  26. 26. EvaluationSome remarks during user test‘Compare’ and ‘Search’ button are placedtoo close together.Dots in the map might be mistaken forcapital citiesAxis should be calibrated on the pop-upsCan you only push the ‘Compare’ button if(more than) one association is selected?Compare more than two associations?woensdag 22 mei 13
  27. 27. EvaluationSUS-questionnaire➠ express the quality with a number➠ get a view of the usability of theapplicationSUS-score = 74woensdag 22 mei 13
  28. 28. ContentIntroductionDesign choicesPaper prototypeDigital prototypeExpert evaluationEvaluation digital prototypeWhat we learnedTeamworkTechnical issuesFuture workwoensdag 22 mei 13
  29. 29. ChangesScale : no continuous colors, but discrete➠ beter visualize the differencesLocation of search and compare button are(hopefully) betterwoensdag 22 mei 13
  30. 30. Digital prototypewoensdag 22 mei 13
  31. 31. Digital prototypewoensdag 22 mei 13
  32. 32. Digital prototypewoensdag 22 mei 13
  33. 33. Digital prototypewoensdag 22 mei 13
  34. 34. Digital prototypewoensdag 22 mei 13
  35. 35. Digital prototypewoensdag 22 mei 13
  36. 36. Digital prototypewoensdag 22 mei 13
  37. 37. Digital prototypewoensdag 22 mei 13
  38. 38. Digital prototypewoensdag 22 mei 13
  39. 39. Remarks from class0 papers graph not clearColor scale not clear➠ continuous scale is better than 5 colorswoensdag 22 mei 13
  40. 40. ContentIntroductionDesign choicesPaper prototypeDigital prototypeExpert evaluationEvaluation digital prototypeWhat we learnedTeamworkTechnical issuesFuture workwoensdag 22 mei 13
  41. 41. Expert evaluationTransparency adds too much complexity tothe overview map➠ chose what to visualize (switched view?)Small markers visible at a higher level?Keep an overview of the entire map whilezoomed inGraph in compare view is confusingEvaluation over time?woensdag 22 mei 13
  42. 42. ChangesAdded radiobuttonsTwo levels :- quantity- conferenceNo moretransparencyOverview mapwoensdag 22 mei 13
  43. 43. ContentIntroductionDesign choicesPaper prototypeDigital prototypeExpert evaluationEvaluation digital prototypeWhat we learnedTeamworkTechnical issuesFuture workwoensdag 22 mei 13
  44. 44. Evaluation - remarksRadio buttons difficult to seeHard to click the ‘compare city’ button➠ caused by the computerGraphs : unclear x-axisInteresting to look at multiple cities,since there is mostly only one paper about asubjectwoensdag 22 mei 13
  45. 45. EvaluationSUS-score = 65.6woensdag 22 mei 13
  46. 46. ContentIntroductionDesign choicesPaper prototypeDigital prototypeExpert evaluationEvaluation digital prototypeWhat we learnedTeamworkTechnical issuesFuture workwoensdag 22 mei 13
  47. 47. What we learnedSome associations have a strong preferencefor one of the conferences‘learning’ gives a divided imageLearning analytics andmachine learning bothconcern learningVisualize both conferencesSocial network analysismainly LAKonly popular in certain countrieswoensdag 22 mei 13
  48. 48. What we learnedSome associations have a strong preferencefor one of the conferences‘learning’ gives a divided imageLearning analytics andmachine learning bothconcern learningVisualize both conferencesSocial network analysismainly LAKonly popular in certain countrieswoensdag 22 mei 13
  49. 49. What we learnedImportant to get an idea about the dataImportant to get an idea about what whatpeople want to know about the datawoensdag 22 mei 13
  50. 50. ContentIntroductionDesign choicesPaper prototypeDigital prototypeExpert evaluationEvaluation digital prototypeWhat we learnedTeamworkTechnical issuesFuture workwoensdag 22 mei 13
  51. 51. Teamwork?First meeting to look at what we wanted andhow we wanted to do visualize itDivided the tasksEveryone did their partGreet did evaluation, Anne and Ward workedon the changeswoensdag 22 mei 13
  52. 52. ContentIntroductionDesign choicesPaper prototypeDigital prototypeExpert evaluationEvaluation digital prototypeWhat we learnedTeamworkTechnical issuesFuture workwoensdag 22 mei 13
  53. 53. Technical issues?Clash between markers and pop-upsLocation of universitiesNaming of universitye.g. Katholieke Universiteit Leuven vs.K.U.LeuvenColoring countrieswoensdag 22 mei 13
  54. 54. ContentIntroductionDesign choicesPaper prototypeDigital prototypeExpert evaluationEvaluation digital prototypeWhat we learnedTeamworkTechnical issuesFuture workwoensdag 22 mei 13
  55. 55. Future workWhite-space in compare boxesMore information about a paper oruniversityEvaluation over timeSearch option when selected “# papers”woensdag 22 mei 13
  56. 56. DEMOwoensdag 22 mei 13
  57. 57. woensdag 22 mei 13
  58. 58. ?Questions?woensdag 22 mei 13
  1. A particular slide catching your eye?

    Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

×