An overview of piv initiatives(papaloi,gouscos)final21.5

  • 696 views
Uploaded on

 

More in: Education , Technology
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
696
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
6

Actions

Shares
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
1

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. An Overview of Parliamentary Information Visualization (PIV) Initiatives: Assessing their Completeness and Contribution to Parliamentary Openness Aspasia Papaloi PhD Candidate, Laboratory of New Technologies in Communication, Education and the Mass Media, Faculty of Communication and Media Studies, University of Athens, Greece, apapaloi@media.uoa.gr Dimitris Gouscos Assistant Professor, Laboratory of New Technologies in Communication, Education and the Mass Media, Faculty of Communication and Media Studies, University of Athens, Greece, gouscos@media.uoa.gr
  • 2. Major points & Methodology Part I 1. Aggregation of 19 PIV initiatives 2. Identification of project scale (European, national, federal, regional) 3. Adaptation based on 4 areas of concern of Parliamentary Informatics (PI) (individual legislators; particular legislative proposals; votes; text of legislation) 4. Outcomes: most common visualized parliamentary information and visualization methods Part II 1. Setting criteria for PIV completeness 2. Best practices of PIV completeness 3. Overall evaluation of the PIV initiatives and contribution to Parliamentary Openness
  • 3. Limitations In terms of the authors: • Subjective point of view as users • Language barriers in understanding, interpreting or further exploring some visualizations and metadata In terms of the enablers: • Not 100% verified information • Difficulty in acquiring parliamentary data (via scrapping)
  • 4. European scale projects
  • 5. Findings-Part I: • Complexity of parliamentary function • Wide range of combination possibilities between parliamentary information and visualization methods • Variety of visualization methods for each area of concern on PI • Most common visualization methods: bar charts, pie charts, line charts, data maps, tree maps, timelines, scatterplots, tables, word clouds • Most common visualized parliamentary information: Information about individual legislators (characteristics, personal data, attendance, activity, performance etc.)
  • 6. Setting criteria for PIV completeness (according to Dörk, M., Feng, P., Collins, C. & Carpendale, S. (2013)) • Connection Connect and engage viewers via maps, shaping of visualizations etc. • Disclosure Designer aspirations on visualization effects via ability to exchange views with enablers, via background information etc. • Plurality Presentation of multiple aspects & variety of interpretations • Contingency Flexible visualizations leading to further exploration • Empowerment Interaction among users, use of information both in digital and physical context, switch from awareness to civic engagement
  • 7. Findings-Part II: • Maps recommended on projects with federal system • Visualization shaping=Self-exploration & further insights • Pros and cons for multiple aspects and variety of interpretations • Data sets with too much information: detailed analysis and background information • Interdependence between disclosure and contingency: occasionally lack of further exploration without the provision of background information
  • 8. 1. Connecting with maps: recommended for projects with federal system (Source: http://www.nossenateurs.fr/)
  • 9. 2.Visualization shaping: self exploration & feeling of further insights (Source: http://capitolwords.org/?terma=war&termb=peace)
  • 10. 3. Large data sets providing multiple aspects & variety of interpretations: necessity on detailed analysis and background information (http://parltrack.euwiki.org/dossiers)
  • 11. 4. Interdependence between Disclosure & Contingency: methodology provision enables further exploration (Source: https://www.govtrack.us/)
  • 12. Best practices of PIV completeness French National Assembly (‘Nos Députés’) French Senate (‘Nos Sénateurs’) Italian Chamber of Deputies (Open Parlamento) European Parliament (VoteWatch Europe)
  • 13. Connection and contribution of PIV initiatives to Parliamentary Openness Provision of information on MPs assets, votes, performance etc. Provision of information as complete as possible (stating limitations) Time of data updating Manner of data updating
  • 14. Continuous effort… • Teams acquainted with the legislative procedure • User-centric design • Guidance and explanation to the user on the selected method, use and expected outcomes • Provision of both traditional and contemporary means of information sharing • User motivation for further engagement offline and online
  • 15. Thank you! Questions and Comments?
  • 16. ACCOMPANYING SLIDES
  • 17. Nos Députés http://www.nosdeputes.fr/
  • 18. Open Parlamento http://parlamento17.openpolis.it/
  • 19. VoteWatch Europe http://www.votewatch.eu/
  • 20. Methodology section