pith. sign in

arxiv: 2607.01593 · v1 · pith:JNE665AEnew · submitted 2026-07-02 · 💻 cs.HC

Made to Feel: How Designers Bring Emotions into Affective Visualization

Yixin Bai , Ziyi Wang , Keke Wu , Fumeng Yang This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-07-03 07:14 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.HC
keywords affective visualizationdesign processemotionsvisualization practitionersthematic analysisethical considerationsuser engagementdata visualization
0
0 comments X

The pith

Visualization designers let affective intent emerge during the process and build emotional impact through accumulated choices across data, design, and audience facets rather than planning it upfront or isolating single elements.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper investigates how visualization designers incorporate emotions into affective visualizations by conducting semi-structured interviews with 15 practitioners and applying hybrid thematic analysis. It establishes that designers structure their emotional work around three functions emotions can serve for viewers—entry, engagement, and outcome—and three facets of the design process: data, design, and audience, along with associated strategies and ethical considerations. The central observation is that affective intent typically surfaces mid-process instead of being set at the beginning, and that emotional effects result from layered decisions rather than isolated visual features. This addresses a gap in understanding the actual practices behind affective visualization design. Evaluation stands out as an ongoing challenge noted by participants.

Core claim

Through interviews with 15 visualization practitioners and hybrid thematic analysis, the authors identify three functions that emotions serve for viewers (entry, engagement, outcome), three facets through which designers engage with emotion (data, design, audience) together with concrete design strategies, and ethical considerations that arise in the process. They observe that affective intent often emerges during the design process rather than being planned from the outset, and that emotional impact arises from accumulated design choices rather than isolated visual elements. Evaluation is highlighted as a persistent practical challenge.

What carries the argument

Three viewer functions (entry, engagement, outcome) and three design facets (data, design, audience) that organize how practitioners introduce and manage emotion in visualizations.

If this is right

  • Designers can deliberately support the three functions to shape viewer responses at different stages.
  • Emotional outcomes depend on choices made across the data, design, and audience facets rather than any one element.
  • Ethical review should occur throughout the iterative design process rather than only at the end.
  • Evaluation methods for affective visualizations require new approaches beyond current practices.
  • Affective intent can be treated as an emergent property that designers refine over time.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Visualization authoring tools could add features that help designers explore and track emerging emotional goals iteratively.
  • The three-function, three-facet structure might transfer to other emotion-sensitive design fields such as interface or narrative design.
  • Controlled experiments could test whether deliberately varying choices within the facets produces measurable differences in viewer emotion.
  • Wider use of these patterns could shift visualization practice toward more intentional yet flexible emotional layering.

Load-bearing premise

The sample of 15 visualization practitioners and the hybrid thematic analysis produce findings that generalize beyond the interviewed individuals to broader design practices in affective visualization.

What would settle it

A larger study or direct observation of design sessions showing that affective intent is typically fixed at project start or that single visual elements reliably drive emotional responses would contradict the emergence and accumulation claims.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.01593 by Fumeng Yang, Keke Wu, Yixin Bai, Ziyi Wang.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Overview of our method and findings. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 15 visualization designers. From the interviews, we identify the functions of emotion for viewers, the facets of how designers work with emotions, and the ethical considerations in designing affective visualization. Icons were created using GPT Image 2 or under a Flaticon license. ABSTRACT Affective visualization is increasin… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Affective visualization is increasingly studied in visualization research, yet how designers bring emotions into their visualization work remains unexplored. This paper addresses this gap through semi-structured interviews with 15 visualization practitioners. Using hybrid thematic analysis, we identify: (1) three functions that emotions can serve for viewers (entry, engagement, outcome); (2) three facets of how designers work with emotion (data, design, audience), along with design strategies; and (3) ethical considerations in the design process. We also observe that affective intent often emerges during the design process rather than being planned from the outset, and that emotional impact arises from accumulated design choices rather than isolated visual elements. Finally, we highlight evaluation as a key challenge identified by our participants.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper reports results from semi-structured interviews with 15 visualization practitioners analyzed with hybrid thematic analysis. It identifies three functions emotions can serve for viewers (entry, engagement, outcome), three facets of designers' work with emotion (data, design, audience) together with associated strategies, ethical considerations in the process, and two process observations: affective intent typically emerges during design rather than being planned at the outset, and emotional impact arises from accumulated design choices rather than isolated elements. Evaluation is noted as an open challenge.

Significance. If the thematic patterns are robustly grounded, the work supplies a structured vocabulary and process account that directly addresses an acknowledged gap in affective visualization research. The functions/facets framework and the emphasis on emergent rather than a-priori intent could usefully inform both future empirical studies and practical design guidelines.

major comments (2)
  1. [Methods] Methods section: the abstract and available description supply no information on interview protocol, participant recruitment or selection criteria, the concrete steps of the hybrid thematic analysis, or any reliability checks such as inter-coder agreement or saturation assessment. These omissions make it impossible to evaluate the evidential basis for the three functions and three facets that constitute the central claims.
  2. [Results/Discussion] Results/Discussion: the claim that the identified functions and facets structure how designers work with emotion in general rests on a sample of 15 practitioners, yet no details on sample diversity, theoretical saturation, member checking, or triangulation with design artifacts or prior literature are supplied. This leaves the transferability of the framework unsecured.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the sentence describing the analysis method could be expanded by one clause to name the participant count and the hybrid thematic approach for immediate clarity.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback, which highlights important areas for improving methodological transparency and clarifying the scope of our claims. We address each major comment below, indicating revisions where appropriate.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Methods] Methods section: the abstract and available description supply no information on interview protocol, participant recruitment or selection criteria, the concrete steps of the hybrid thematic analysis, or any reliability checks such as inter-coder agreement or saturation assessment. These omissions make it impossible to evaluate the evidential basis for the three functions and three facets that constitute the central claims.

    Authors: We agree that the Methods section requires substantially more detail to support evaluation of the findings. In the revised manuscript we will expand this section to describe the interview protocol (including sample questions), recruitment channels and selection criteria, the specific procedures followed in the hybrid thematic analysis (including codebook development and iteration), and any steps taken toward reliability such as inter-coder discussion or saturation assessment. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Results/Discussion] Results/Discussion: the claim that the identified functions and facets structure how designers work with emotion in general rests on a sample of 15 practitioners, yet no details on sample diversity, theoretical saturation, member checking, or triangulation with design artifacts or prior literature are supplied. This leaves the transferability of the framework unsecured.

    Authors: We will add a dedicated subsection on participants that reports demographic and professional diversity. We will also document how theoretical saturation was assessed during analysis and whether member checking occurred. Triangulation with design artifacts was not part of the study protocol; we will explicitly note this as a limitation and qualify the framework as exploratory and grounded in the interviewed sample rather than claiming general applicability. Language throughout the Results and Discussion will be adjusted to emphasize transferability considerations. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: qualitative thematic analysis contains no derivations or self-referential reductions

full rationale

The paper reports results from semi-structured interviews with 15 practitioners followed by hybrid thematic analysis. No equations, parameters, predictions, or derivations appear anywhere in the manuscript. The three functions (entry, engagement, outcome), three facets (data, design, audience), and observations about emergent affective intent are presented as direct outputs of the coding process applied to participant responses. None of the seven enumerated circularity patterns apply: there is no self-definition of variables, no fitted input relabeled as prediction, no load-bearing self-citation chain, and no imported uniqueness theorem or ansatz. The central claims rest on the interview corpus itself rather than reducing to prior author work or definitional equivalence. Generalizability limitations are a separate methodological concern, not evidence of circularity.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Qualitative interview study contains no free parameters, mathematical axioms, or invented entities; all content is empirical description derived from participant responses.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5652 in / 1027 out tokens · 17475 ms · 2026-07-03T07:14:16.547886+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

47 extracted references · 29 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    https://informationisbeautiful.net/wdvp/gallery- 2019, 2019

    Information Is Beautiful. https://informationisbeautiful.net/wdvp/gallery- 2019, 2019. Accessed: 2026-06-27. 2

    2019

  2. [2]

    Al-Hazwani, K

    I. Al-Hazwani, K. E. A. Zhang, L. Garrison, and J. Bernard. Data humanism decoded: A characterization of its principles to bridge data visualization researchers and practitioners. InIEEE VIS Short Papers,

  3. [3]

    doi: 10.1109/VIS60296.2025.00057 1

    work page doi:10.1109/vis60296.2025.00057 2025

  4. [4]

    Baigelenov, P

    A. Baigelenov, P. Shukla, and P. Parsons. How visualization designers perceive and use inspiration. InCHI. ACM, New York, 2025. doi: 10 .1145/3706598.3714191 2

    work page arXiv 2025

  5. [5]

    Bartram, A

    L. Bartram, A. Patra, and M. Stone. Affective color in visualization. InCHI, 2017. doi: 10.1145/3025453.3026041 2

    work page doi:10.1145/3025453.3026041 2017

  6. [6]

    Bradley, G

    C. Blair, X. Wang, and C. Perin. Quantifying emotional responses to immutable data characteristics and designer choices in data visual- izations.TVCG, 31(1):1006–1016, 2025. doi: 10.1109/TVCG.2024. 3456361 1, 2, 3, 4

    work page doi:10.1109/tvcg.2024 2025

  7. [7]

    J. Boy, A. V . Pandey, J. Emerson, M. Satterthwaite, O. Nov, and E. Bertini. Showing people behind data: Does anthropomorphizing visualizations elicit more empathy for human rights data? InCHI,

  8. [8]

    doi: 10.1145/3025453.3025512 1, 2, 4

    work page doi:10.1145/3025453.3025512

  9. [9]

    Braun and V

    V . Braun and V . Clarke. Using thematic analysis in psychology.Qual- itative Research in Psychology, 3(2):77–101, 2006. doi: 10.1191/ 1478088706qp063oa 4

    2006

  10. [10]

    K. Caine. Local standards for sample size at CHI. InCHI, pp. 981– 992, 2016. doi: 10.1145/2858036.2858498 4

    work page doi:10.1145/2858036.2858498 2016

  11. [11]

    S. K. Card, J. D. Mackinlay, and B. Shneiderman.Readings in Infor- mation Visualization: Using Vision to Think. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, 1999. 1

    1999

  12. [12]

    A. R. Damasio.Descartes’ Error: Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain. G.P. Putnam’s Sons, New York, 1994. 1

    1994

  13. [13]

    Fereday and E

    J. Fereday and E. Muir-Cochrane. Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: A hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development.International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5(1):80–92, 2006. doi: 10.1177/160940690600500107 2

    work page doi:10.1177/160940690600500107 2006

  14. [14]

    L. K. M. Graf and J. R. Landwehr. A dual-process perspective on fluency-based aesthetics: The pleasure-interest model of aesthetic lik- ing.Personality and Social Psychology Review, 19(4):395–410, 2015. doi: 10.1177/1088868315574978 2

    work page doi:10.1177/1088868315574978 2015

  15. [15]

    Halloran

    N. Halloran. The Fallen of World War II.http://www.fallen.io/ ww2/, 2015. Interactive data-driven documentary. 3

    2015

  16. [16]

    A. Kale, M. Kay, and J. Hullman. Visual reasoning strategies for effect size judgments and decisions.TVCG, 27(2):272–282, 2021. doi: 10. 1109/TVCG.2020.3030335 1

    work page arXiv 2021

  17. [17]

    X. Lan, Y . Wu, and N. Cao. Affective visualization design: Leveraging the emotional impact of data.TVCG, 30(1):1–11, 2024. doi: 10.1109/ TVCG.2023.3327385 1, 2, 4

    work page arXiv 2024

  18. [18]

    X. Lan, Y . Wu, Y . Shi, Q. Chen, and N. Cao. Negative emotions, pos- itive outcomes? Exploring the communication of negativity in serious data stories. InCHI, 2022. doi: 10.1145/3491102.3517530 2

    work page doi:10.1145/3491102.3517530 2022

  19. [19]

    Mapping what I feel

    X. Lan, Y . Yang, and Y . Wang. “Mapping what I feel”: Understanding affective geovisualization design through the lens of people–place re- lationships.TVCG, 32(1):145–155, 2026. doi: 10.1109/TVCG.2025. 3633878 2

    work page doi:10.1109/tvcg.2025 2026

  20. [21]

    Lee-Robbins and E

    E. Lee-Robbins and E. Adar. Assessing affective objectives for com- municative visualizations.arXiv:2604.01183, 2026. 2, 4

    work page arXiv 2026

  21. [22]

    G. Lupi. Data humanism: The revolutionary future of data visualiza- tion. http://giorgialupi.com/data-humanism-my-manifesto-for-a-new- data-wold, 2017. Accessed: 2026-06-27. 1, 3

    2017

  22. [23]

    McKenna, D

    S. McKenna, D. Mazur, J. Agutter, and M. Meyer. Design activity framework for visualization design.TVCG, 20(12):2191–2200, 2014. doi: 10.1109/TVCG.2014.2346331 4

    work page doi:10.1109/tvcg.2014.2346331 2014

  23. [24]

    Morais, Y

    L. Morais, Y . Jansen, N. Andrade, and P. Dragicevic. Can anthropo- graphics promote prosociality? A review and large-sample study. In CHI, 2021. doi: 10.1145/3411764.3445637 2, 4

    work page doi:10.1145/3411764.3445637 2021

  24. [25]

    T. Munzner. A nested model for visualization design and validation. TVCG, 15(6):921–928, 2009. doi: 10.1109/TVCG.2009.111 4

    work page doi:10.1109/tvcg.2009.111 2009

  25. [26]

    Munzner.Visualization Analysis and Design

    T. Munzner.Visualization Analysis and Design. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2014. 1

    2014

  26. [27]

    R. L. Nabi. Exploring the framing effects of emotion: Do discrete emotions differentially influence information accessibility, informa- tion seeking, and policy preference?Communication Research, 30(2):224–247, 2003. doi: 10.1177/0093650202250881 3

    work page doi:10.1177/0093650202250881 2003

  27. [28]

    R. L. Nabi, A. Gustafson, and R. Jensen. Framing climate change: Exploring the role of emotion in generating advocacy be- havior.Science Communication, 40(4):442–468, 2018. doi: 10.1177/ 1075547018776019 3

    2018

  28. [29]

    P. Parsons. Understanding data visualization design practice.TVCG, 28(1):665–675, 2022. doi: 10.1109/TVCG.2021.3114959 2

    work page doi:10.1109/tvcg.2021.3114959 2022

  29. [30]

    P. C. Parsons and P. C. Shukla. Beyond problem solving: Framing and problem–solution co-evolution in data visualization design.TVCG, 32(1):24–34, 2026. doi: 10.1109/TVCG.2025.3633866 4

    work page doi:10.1109/tvcg.2025.3633866 2026

  30. [31]

    Periscopic. U.S. Gun Deaths.https://guns.periscopic.com/,

  31. [32]

    Interactive data visualization, Accessed: 2026-06-27. 4

    2026

  32. [33]

    V . I. Prantl, T. M ¨oller, and L. Koesten. Untangling rhetoric, pathos, and aesthetics in data visualization.TVCG, 32(2):2435–2453, 2026. doi: 10.1109/TVCG.2025.3628181 1, 2

    work page doi:10.1109/tvcg.2025.3628181 2026

  33. [34]

    R ¨onnberg

    N. R ¨onnberg. Sonification supports perception of brightness contrast. Journal on Multimodal User Interfaces, 15:171–178, 2021. doi: 10. 1007/s12193-020-00378-1 3

    2021

  34. [35]

    J. A. Russell. A circumplex model of affect.Journal of Person- ality and Social Psychology, 39(6):1161–1178, 1980. doi: 10.1037/ h0077714 2

    1980

  35. [36]

    S. Scarr. Iraq’s Bloody Toll. South China Morning Post, 2011. Ac- cessed: 2026-06-27. 1

    2011

  36. [37]

    D. A. Sch ¨on.The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. Basic Books, New York, 1983. 4

    1983

  37. [38]

    Schuster, K

    R. Schuster, K. Gregory, T. M ¨oller, and L. Koesten. Practitioners’ perspectives on designing data visualizations for the general public. InCHI, pp. 1–19, 2026. doi: 10.1145/3772318.3790627 2, 3

    work page doi:10.1145/3772318.3790627 2026

  38. [39]

    Sedlmair, M

    M. Sedlmair, M. Meyer, and T. Munzner. Design study methodology: Reflections from the trenches and the stacks.TVCG, 18(12):2431– 2440, 2012. doi: 10.1109/TVCG.2012.213 4

    work page doi:10.1109/tvcg.2012.213 2012

  39. [40]

    Segel and J

    E. Segel and J. Heer. Narrative visualization: Telling stories with data. TVCG, 16(6):1139–1148, 2010. doi: 10.1109/TVCG.2010.179 1

    work page doi:10.1109/tvcg.2010.179 2010

  40. [41]

    if I look at the mass I will never act

    P. Slovic. “if I look at the mass I will never act”: Psychic numbing and genocide.Judgment and Decision Making, 2(2):79–95, 2007. doi: 10 .1017/S1930297500000061 2, 3

    2007

  41. [42]

    Swain.A Hybrid Approach to Thematic Analysis in Qualitative Research: Using a Practical Example

    J. Swain.A Hybrid Approach to Thematic Analysis in Qualitative Research: Using a Practical Example. SAGE Publications, London,

  42. [43]

    doi: 10.4135/9781526435477 2

    work page doi:10.4135/9781526435477

  43. [44]

    V ¨astfj¨all, P

    D. V ¨astfj¨all, P. Slovic, M. Mayorga, and E. Peters. Compassion fade: Affect and charity are greatest for a single child in need.PLOS ONE, 9(6):e100115, 2014. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0100115 2, 3

    work page doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0100115 2014

  44. [45]

    R. M. Winters and M. M. Wanderley. Sonification of emotion: Strate- gies and results from the intersection with music.Organised Sound, 19(1):60–69, 2014. doi: 10.1017/S1355771813000411 3

    work page doi:10.1017/s1355771813000411 2014

  45. [46]

    F. Yang, M. Cai, C. Mortenson, H. Fakhari, A. D. Lokmanoglu, N. Di- akopoulos, E. C. Nisbet, and M. Kay. Swaying the public? Impacts of election forecast visualizations on emotion, trust, and intention in the 2022 U.S. midterms.TVCG, 30(1):23–33, 2024. doi: 10.1109/TVCG .2023.3327356 1, 2

    work page doi:10.1109/tvcg 2022

  46. [47]

    Zhang and R

    X. Zhang and R. Wakkary. Understanding the role of designers’ per- sonal experiences in interaction design practice. InDIS, 2014. doi: 10 .1145/2598510.2598556 3

    work page arXiv 2014

  47. [48]

    Zhang, Y

    Y . Zhang, Y . Sun, J. D. Gaggiano, N. Kumar, C. Andris, and A. G. Parker. Visualization design practices in a crisis: Behind the scenes with COVID-19 dashboard creators.TVCG, 29(1):1037–1047, 2023. doi: 10.1109/TVCG.2022.3209493 2

    work page doi:10.1109/tvcg.2022.3209493 2023