This document outlines a formative study on designing effective visualization interfaces for planning support systems. The study evaluated nine interface prototypes for a land use planning system called LEAM over three years. Key principles for effective interfaces were derived based on the evaluations. These principles include using appropriate graphic representations and layouts to direct user attention and maintain engagement. Effective graphic representations use proximity and a limited number of attributes to show relationships between different variables. Effective layouts group related drivers and impacts closely, align scales for comparison, and provide motivation and flexibility.

1. Effective Visualization Interfaces
for Planning Support Systems:
a formative study
Kanjanee Budthimedhee, PhD.

2. Overview
 Background
 Research Problem
 Research Objective
 Research Design
 Principles
 Discussion

3. Background: Research Problem
 Planning Support Systems (PSS)
 Data
 Model
 Interface
 How to create effective visualization interfaces?

4. Background: Research Objective
 Literature
 Cognitive quality of graphic components and tasks, Spatial relationship property
between the components, and Human-computer interaction factors
 Principles for effective visualization interfaces not
articulated
 Objective
 Derive principles for designing effective
visualization interfaces

5. PSS Interface Effectiveness
 Making Plan involves Shaping Attention
 PSS must: Direct interest
 Counter short term memory limit
Maintain attention
 Leverage influence of representation

6. Background: Research Method
• Formative evaluation
• Build various interface prototypes
• Assess effectiveness and derive principles
• Questions
• What components are effective?
• What layouts are effective?
• How to direct interest & maintain engagement?

7. Background: Research Design
 Project PSS: Land-use Evaluation and impact
Assessment Model (LEAM)
 Interface design evolved over three years
 Evaluators of interface effectiveness
 LEAM colleagues
 Planning students
 Other stakeholders
 LEAM, a scenario-based PSS simulates regional land-use change as a
consequence of policy choices interacting with different economic and demographic
futures

8. Data
Nine prototypes
Model
 Design
 For each, documented Objectives
Data Technology
 Design objectives
 Data
Component Layout
 Technology
 Interface components
 Interface layout
 Lessons learned Lesson
Learned
 Evaluation
 Tradeoffs

9. Sample Data: Prototype5

10. Principles
Inferences from the data
 Effective Components
 Effective Layout
 Other Principles

11. Principles: Effective Components
 Task
 Local: Summarizing data and Showing trends
 Global: Comparing point and pattern
 Data
 Space
 Time

12. Principles: Grid Summary
Graphic Local Global
representation (One variable, Exact (Different variables,
information) Relationship
comparison)
Non-spatial Static
(One time)
Dynamic
(Different time)
Spatial Static
(One time)
Dynamic
(Different time)

13. Principles: Graphic Representation
Graphic representation Local Global
(One variable, Exact information) (Different variables, Relationship
comparison)
Non- Static -Separated bar -Description -Grouped bar or -Comparison
spatial (One time) or icon [or (summarizing icons -Alternatives
Table chart] data) -2attributes: shape -Options
-1attribute and texture/color -Relations
used: shape or (Add dimension = (Comparing
color see more Points and
relationship) Patterns)
(summarizing
data)
Dynamic -Line or Bars -Trends -Lines or bars -Comparison
(Different -2attributes: (showing -3attributes: shape, -Alternatives
time) shape and trends over texture/color, and -Options
spatial time) spatial pattern -Relations
pattern/location (Comparing
Points and
Patterns)
(showing
trends over
time)

14. Principles: Graphic Representation
Graphic representation Local Global
(One variable, Exact (Different variables, Relationship
information) comparison)
Spatial Static -One-variable -Description -Map using different -Comparison
(W/o time) map or One (summarizing texture or color -Alternatives
object image data) for different -Options
-2attributes: variables -Relations
shape and -3attributes: shape, (Comparing
location texture/color, and Points and
location Patterns)
(summarizing
data)
Dynamic -Summary map, -Aggregation -Multiple maps or -Comparison
(W/ time) animated (summarizing Animated maps -Alternatives
map or data) -3attributes: shape, -Options
multiple (showing color/pattern and -Relations
maps trends location (Comparing
-3attributes: over time) Points and
shape, Patterns)
location, and (showing
color/pattern trends
over time)

15. Principles: Effective Layout
 Role of Media
 Role of Structure
 Provide information about plan and its
consequences
 Help evaluate alternative land use policies
 Display must be proximate
 Display must be comparable

16. Principles: Layout & Media Technology
Existing Paper Document
Economy
Population
Housing/Resident
Education/Social Service
Transportation
Environment

17. Principles: Layout & Media Technology
Existing Electronic Document
Text/Number Map Graph
Land-use
Change
Economy -housing Economy
-school
-infrastructure
Population Population
Environment Environment

18. Principles: Layout
Displaying Interrelationships between Drivers and
Impacts
Drivers Impact
Trends Social Perception
Economic (GDP) Congestion
Population City Growth Energy CS
Land-use
Regulations -residential Economic Cost
-commercial
Ag. Preservation -industrial Infra costs
River Bluff Hidden cost
Investments Environment
Ring Road Habitat FM
New infrastructure Forest lost

19. Principles: Layout
Comparing Alternatives
Scenario1 vs 1 vs 2: Impact
Scenario2: Grouped bar chart
Scenario1: driver Difference Map
Impact description
Scenario2: driver Text

20. Discussion: Wickens on Layout
Proximity of:
Drivers & Impacts

21. Discussion: Wickens on Layout
Proximity of:
Compare Policies

22. Discussion: Cleveland on Layout
Align Scale:
Comparison

23. Other principles
 Provide motivation
 Maintain engagement
 Provide functional flexibility
 Experience / familiarity
 Interface Complexity
 Way-finding
 Clarity & Transparency
 Innovative surprise Maximum number
of animals
<100
100-200
200-500
> 500
No Data

24. Conclusion
 Bridgethe gap in PSS interface literature
 Improvement
 Broader range of users/evaluators
 More formative study of PSS development
 Future study
 Experimental study of each principle
 Aural media as an enhancement

26. Discussion: Tufte on Graphic
Component
 Perhaps not Data : Ink
 Perhaps 1 piece of Data : 1 graphic Attribute

27. Discussion: Wickens on Graphic
Component
 Proximity
 Memory limit -7+ chunks
 3 attributes in one graphic
make up 1 chunk