Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

How Good is ChatGPT in Giving Advice on Your Visualization Design?

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2310.09617 v5 pith:M6SJQS54 submitted 2023-10-14 cs.HC

classification cs.HC
keywords designchatgptvisualizationdataquestionsaddressfeedbackhuman
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Data visualization creators often lack formal training, resulting in a knowledge gap in design practice. Large language models such as ChatGPT, with their vast internet-scale training data, offer transformative potential to address this gap. In this study, we used both qualitative and quantitative methods to investigate how well ChatGPT can address visualization design questions. First, we quantitatively compared the ChatGPT-generated responses with anonymous online Human replies to data visualization questions on the VisGuides user forum. Next, we conducted a qualitative user study examining the reactions and attitudes of practitioners toward ChatGPT as a visualization design assistant. Participants were asked to bring their visualizations and design questions and received feedback from both Human experts and ChatGPT in randomized order. Our findings from both studies underscore ChatGPT's strengths, particularly its ability to rapidly generate diverse design options, while also highlighting areas for improvement, such as nuanced contextual understanding and fluid interaction dynamics beyond the chat interface. Drawing on these insights, we discuss design considerations for future LLM-based design feedback systems.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Understanding Why ChatGPT Outperforms Humans in Visualization Design Advice

    cs.HC 2025-08 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    ChatGPT responses to visualization design questions were rated higher than forum-user responses, mainly due to broader coverage and task-focused structure, with GPT-4 showing a hybrid of human and GPT-3.5 styles.

  2. Automated Visualization Makeovers with LLMs

    cs.HC 2025-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A prompt-based LLM system detects visualization flaws in chart images and code, achieving near-perfect detection of structural errors like non-zero baselines and dual axes but weaker performance on stylistic issues.

  3. Leveraging LLMs for Persona-Based Visualization of Election Data

    cs.HC 2025-07 reject novelty 3.0 of 10

    LLM-generated voter personas are used to derive design criteria and prototypes for UK election visualizations, which are then evaluated by another LLM.

Pith tools