Vis4Vis: Visualization for (Empirical) Visualization Research

Daniel Weiskopf

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 83 references

Vis4Vis: Visualization for (Empirical) Visualization Research

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This position paper argues that the visualization community should establish Vis4Vis—visualization for visualization—as a subfield using visualization to analyze and communicate the rich data collected during empirical visualization…

desk verdict A clear, honest position paper that names an existing practice; the case for a new subfield rests on an unproven premise that traditional evaluation methods are failing. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.00611 v1 pith:ZLS7I7QF submitted 2019-08-01 cs.HC cs.GR

Daniel Weiskopf This is my paper · ORCID

classification cs.HCcs.GR

keywords Vis4Visvisualizationforempiricalresearchevaluationmethodologyeyetrackingvisualanalyticsdata-richuserstudiesin-the-wild

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This position paper argues that empirical evaluation in visualization research is outgrowing its inherited methods: sensors and logging now produce large, time-dependent, heterogeneous study data that traditional statistical user studies were not designed to handle. The author proposes a new subfield, Vis4Vis (visualization for visualization), defined as using visualization to analyze and communicate data from empirical studies in order to advance visualization research itself. If the proposal is right, visual analytics of data-rich study recordings becomes a standard part of evaluation, especially for in-the-wild, mobile, and collaborative settings where controlled laboratory conditions no longer apply. The paper makes the case through eye tracking as a worked example and then generalizes to other sensor, interaction, video, audio, and performance data.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is the visual analytics pipeline adapted to study recordings, illustrated in the paper by an eye-tracking analysis pipeline: raw gaze and complementary data are processed and annotated, mapped to spatial, temporal, and relational visualizations, and explored through two linked loops—a foraging loop for investigating observables and a sensemaking loop for building, confirming, or rejecting hypotheses. The paper generalizes this pipeline to any timestamped observational data, since data from different sensors and logs can be registered along a common timeline even when sampled at different rates. The machinery does the work of turning unstructured sensor and log streams into interpretable evidence that informs and validates empirical visualization research.

What would settle it

A concrete test would be a systematic comparison of evaluation practice before and after adopting visual analytics of rich study data: if a set of complex visualization evaluations yields the same conclusions, reliability, and insight from conventional statistics alone as from adding interactive visual analysis of eye tracking, interaction logs, or physiological data, the claim that traditional methods are insufficient would be contradicted. A meta-analysis of in-the-wild visualization studies showing that standard methods already capture their findings would also settle the question.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that visualization researchers should make their own empirical studies an application domain for visualization. Established evaluation approaches, mostly adopted from other fields and earlier, data-poor eras, are increasingly unable to capture the complexity of sophisticated visualization systems; the proposed remedy is to collect rich observational data during studies and to analyze and report that data with visualization. Eye tracking serves as the worked example: visual exploration of scanpaths, areas of interest, and spatiotemporal gaze data has already helped form hypotheses and identify qualitative findings in the author's own studies. From that example the paper generalizes to a data model of timestamped, heterogeneous observational data and argues that the visual analytics pipeline—processing, mapping, interactive exploration, and sensemaking—should be applied to study data as a matter of course, and that Vis4Vis should be explicitly recognized in conference scopes and calls for papers.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that established empirical methods can no longer capture the full complexity of evaluating sophisticated visualization systems; if traditional controlled user studies and statistics still suffice for this purpose, the case for establishing Vis4Vis as a new subfield loses much of its force.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Data-rich recordings of gaze, interaction, physiology, video, and audio become a standard component of empirical visualization evaluation, especially for studies in the wild and mobile settings.
Visualization conferences and paper keywords explicitly include visualization research as an application domain, so Vis4Vis contributions are reviewed as first-class application papers.
Researchers develop new visualization-based methods for reporting complex study results, including storytelling, and for privacy-preserving release of open research data.
Visual analytics, statistical testing, and machine learning are combined into an analysis toolkit for study data, with the author expecting this to carry over to neighboring disciplines.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

A reader can infer that the proposal's success is measurable: if Vis4Vis is adopted, evaluation sections of visualization papers will begin to include interactive visual analysis systems or links to them, alongside traditional statistics.
The argument is strongest for studies where each participant sees different stimuli, such as mobile eye tracking in the wild; a natural extension is to test Vis4Vis methods first in those settings rather than in controlled lab trials.
The paper's emphasis on keeping raw data in the analysis pipeline implies a broader reproducibility agenda: published study results could come with the visual analysis setup itself, not just the raw data, making replication more concrete.
Because the paper frames evaluation as an application domain, it implicitly predicts that visualization of study data will become a source of new visualization techniques that later generalizes to fields outside visualization.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

I’ll cut to the chase: this is a position paper, not a research paper, and it should be read as such. It names something that already exists—using visualization and visual analytics to make sense of eye-tracking and interaction data from visualization studies—and argues that this practice deserves recognition as its own subfield. That’s the actual contribution: a useful label and a call to action, supported by a clear synthesis of prior work.

The paper does several things well. The writing is direct and well organized. Section 3’s eye-tracking pipeline (foraging/sensemaking loops) is a nice frame, and the three examples from the author’s own work—scatterplots/parallel coordinates, metro maps, tree diagrams—concretely show how visual analysis generated hypotheses that later became testable metrics. That is real evidence, and it is the strongest part of the case. I also appreciate that the author explicitly acknowledges, in Section 4.2, that interactive analysis has reliability problems, and in Section 6 that Vis4Vis is not the only answer.

The soft spot is the load-bearing premise. The abstract says established methods ‘can no longer capture the full complexity of the evaluation,’ but the paper never demonstrates that any traditional method actually failed. The cited examples show visualization as a complement to statistical testing—visualization fed hypotheses, statistics confirmed them. That’s an argument for adding visualization to the toolbox, not for a new subfield built on the inadequacy of existing methods. If the author wants the strong version of the claim, we need documented cases where standard evaluation broke down and visual analysis succeeded. Without that, the proposal stands as a well-argued recommendation, not an established need.

On citations: the pattern is heavily self-referential, but the cited work is genuinely the relevant prior art, and I don’t see missing references. Self-citation here is not a flaw so much as a reminder that this is one group’s agenda.

Who is this for? Researchers working on visualization evaluation, especially eye-tracking studies, and anyone in the BELIV community. They’ll get a clear framing and a useful term. It’s a good reading-group discussion piece.

Bottom line: yes, it deserves serious peer review as a position statement. The reviewer should ask for evidence for the strong premise, or a rewording that drops it. But the paper is coherent, honest, and citable.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. This position paper argues that empirical visualization research should establish a new subfield, 'Vis4Vis' (visualization for visualization), in which visualization methods are used to analyze and communicate the large, heterogeneous, time-dependent data acquired during empirical studies. The author claims that traditional evaluation methods can no longer capture the full complexity of increasingly sophisticated visualization systems, and that data-rich observations (eye tracking, physiological sensors, interaction logs) combined with interactive visual analysis offer a promising route. The paper grounds the argument in eye tracking research, describes a generalized problem characterization with data/visualization types and analysis/dissemination goals, and issues a call to action for integrating Vis4Vis into major venues and research practices. The manuscript is explicitly framed as a subjective position statement rather than a systematic review or empirical validation.

Significance. If the central claim is accepted, Vis4Vis could become a recognized application domain within visualization research, influencing how empirical studies are designed, analyzed, and reported, and potentially extending to HCI and other data-rich empirical disciplines. The paper's strengths include a concrete pipeline for eye tracking analysis (Figure 1), a clear enumeration of open challenges (e.g., data fusion, scalability, privacy), and an honest acknowledgment of its subjective nature and the reliability limits of interactive visual analysis. However, the significance rests on an unverified premise about the insufficiency of established evaluation methods; the presented examples show visualization as a valuable complement to statistical testing rather than as a necessary replacement, so the case for a distinct subfield remains conditional.

major comments (3)

[Abstract and Section 1] The load-bearing assertion that 'many of the established methods of empirical studies can no longer capture the full complexity of the evaluation' is stated as a fact without systematic supporting evidence. The examples in Section 3 (Netzel et al. [64], Netzel et al. [63], Burch et al. [16]) show visualization helping to formulate hypotheses and define new dependent measures that are then tested statistically, which demonstrates complementarity with traditional methods rather than their failure or insufficiency. To make the case for a new subfield, the paper should either provide documented cases where traditional methods demonstrably failed to capture relevant complexity, or clearly reframe this premise as a conjecture and argue for it on programmatic grounds.
[Section 4.2] The paper acknowledges that interactive visual analysis 'might lead to different findings, depending on the interaction steps taken by the analyst' and therefore is typically accompanied by statistical analysis to obtain controlled answers. This acknowledgment directly qualifies the abstract's claim that data-rich visual analysis provides 'more reliable interpretations of empirical research.' The manuscript should either reconcile this tension or soften the reliability claim, because the current wording overstates the epistemic status of visual analysis while its own limitation note undermines it.
[Section 5] The call to action to integrate Vis4Vis into main conference keywords and venues presumes that existing venues (BELIV, ETVIS) are insufficient for the proposed agenda. The paper notes that BELIV 'implicitly supports' Vis4Vis and ETVIS does so for eye tracking, but it does not explain why these venues could not accommodate or be extended to the broader Vis4Vis scope. Without this argument, the institutional reform proposal is not fully justified, even if the technical direction is sound.

minor comments (4)

[Section 3, Figure 2 caption] The caption lists labels A, B, C, D, and F but no E, and it references 'temporal navigation (F)' while the timeline is also described as 'F' earlier; please recheck the label assignments and correct the inconsistency.
[Section 4.1] The text says 'whether we have to analyze data for individual participants or groups of participates'; 'participates' should be 'participants'.
[References] Some reference formatting is inconsistent, e.g., reference [10] renders 'V A2' instead of 'VA2', and [46] abbreviates 'IEEE Transactions Visualization Computer Graphics' instead of the full journal name; please unify style.
[Throughout] The term 'Vis4Vis' is sometimes written with a space ('visualization for visualization ( Vis4Vis)') and sometimes without; please make the typography consistent.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the paper is an explicitly subjective position statement whose central proposal is an agenda, not a derivation from its cited examples.

full rationale

The paper does not derive a quantitative result or fit parameters; it argues for a research agenda (Vis4Vis). The load-bearing claim that established methods 'can no longer capture the full complexity' is an asserted premise, and the paper's examples (Netzel et al., Burch et al., Blascheck et al.) are offered as illustrative evidence that visualization is useful for analyzing data-rich studies. Although many references are to the author's own prior work, none is invoked as a uniqueness theorem or as a result that by construction entails the proposal; Section 5 explicitly calls the recommendations 'quite subjective', and Section 6 concedes Vis4Vis is not the only answer. Thus there is no step in which a prediction or conclusion reduces by definition to an input, and no self-citation chain is load-bearing in a way that would make the argument circular.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The proposal rests on three unvalidated domain assumptions: the insufficiency of traditional evaluation methods, the ability to align heterogeneous study data on a timeline, and the effectiveness of visual analysis for interpreting such data. No free parameters are fitted, and one named entity (Vis4Vis) is introduced without independent evidence.

assumptions (3)

domain assumption Established empirical methods can no longer capture the full complexity of evaluating sophisticated visualization systems
Stated in the abstract and Section 1 to motivate Vis4Vis; no systematic evidence is provided for this insufficiency.
domain assumption Data-rich observations from different sensors and logs can be registered along a common timeline
Section 4.1 assumes that time stamps allow alignment across heterogeneous sources, though the paper acknowledges technical difficulty.
domain assumption Visual data analysis is an effective route to reliable interpretation of complex study data
Central to the proposal; supported only by selected examples from the author's own group rather than comparative evidence.

invented entities (1)

Vis4Vis subfield
purpose: Name and frame a research agenda for using visualization to analyze and communicate empirical visualization study data
The paper proposes this subfield; no falsifiable predictions or independent empirical validation are provided.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Vis4Vis: Visualization for (Empirical) Visualization Research." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZLS7I7QF

@misc{pith2026190800611,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Vis4Vis: Visualization for (Empirical) Visualization Research},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZLS7I7QF}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.00611}
}

read the original abstract

Appropriate evaluation is a key component in visualization research. It is typically based on empirical studies that assess visualization components or complete systems. While such studies often include the user of the visualization, empirical research is not necessarily restricted to user studies but may also address the technical performance of a visualization system such as its computational speed or memory consumption. Any such empirical experiment faces the issue that the underlying visualization is becoming increasingly sophisticated, leading to an increasingly difficult evaluation in complex environments. Therefore, many of the established methods of empirical studies can no longer capture the full complexity of the evaluation. One promising solution is the use of data-rich observations that we can acquire during studies to obtain more reliable interpretations of empirical research. For example, we have been witnessing an increasing availability and use of physiological sensor information from eye tracking, electrodermal activity sensors, electroencephalography, etc. Other examples are various kinds of logs of user activities such as mouse, keyboard, or touch interaction. Such data-rich empirical studies promise to be especially useful for studies in the wild and similar scenarios outside of the controlled laboratory environment. However, with the growing availability of large, complex, time-dependent, heterogeneous, and unstructured observational data, we are facing the new challenge of how we can analyze such data. This challenge can be addressed by establishing the subfield of visualization for visualization (Vis4Vis): visualization as a means of analyzing and communicating data from empirical studies to advance visualization research.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

83 extracted references · 80 canonical work pages

[64]

Visual Informatics1(2), 118– 131 (2017)

Netzel, R., Vuong, J., Engelke, U., O’Donoghue, S.I., Weiskopf, D., Heinrich, J.: Comparative eye-tracking evaluation of scatterplots and parallel coordinates. Visual Informatics1(2), 118– 131 (2017)

work page 2017
[63]

Spatial Cognition & Computation 17(1-2), 39–64 (2017)

Netzel, R., Ohlhausen, B., Kurzhals, K., Woods, R., Burch, M., Weiskopf, D.: User perfor- mance and reading strategies for metro maps: An eye tracking study. Spatial Cognition & Computation 17(1-2), 39–64 (2017)

work page 2017
[16]

In: Proceedings of the IEEE Paciﬁc Visualization Symposium, pp

Burch, M., Andrienko, G.L., Andrienko, N.V ., H ¨oferlin, M., Raschke, M., Weiskopf, D.: Vi- sual task solution strategies in tree diagrams. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Paciﬁc Visualization Symposium, pp. 169–176 (2013)

work page 2013
[1]

In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Beyond Time And Errors: Novel Evaluation Methods for Visualization (BE- LIV), pp

Anderson, E.W.: Evaluating visualization using cognitive measures. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Beyond Time And Errors: Novel Evaluation Methods for Visualization (BE- LIV), pp. 1–4 (2012)

2012
[2]

Computer Graphics Forum 30(3), 791–800 (2011)

Anderson, E.W., Potter, K.C., Matzen, L.E., Shepherd, J.F., Preston, G.A., Silva, C.T.: A user study of visualization effectiveness using EEG and cognitive load. Computer Graphics Forum 30(3), 791–800 (2011)

2011
[3]

IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 18(12), 2889–2898 (2012)

Andrienko, G.L., Andrienko, N.V ., Burch, M., Weiskopf, D.: Visual analytics methodology for eye movement studies. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 18(12), 2889–2898 (2012)

2012
[4]

Beck, F., Blascheck, T., Ertl, T., Weiskopf, D.: Exploring word-sized graphics for visualiz- ing eye tracking data within transcribed experiment recordings. In: M. Burch, L. Chuang, B. Fisher, A. Schmidt, D. Weiskopf (eds.) Eye Tracking and Visualization: Foundations, Tech- niques, and Applications, pp. 113–128. Springer (2016)

work page 2016
[5]

IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 22(1), 180–189 (2016)

Beck, F., Koch, S., Weiskopf, D.: Visual analysis and dissemination of scientiﬁc literature collections with SurVis. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 22(1), 180–189 (2016)

work page 2016

Show all 83 references

[6]

In: Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Visual Analytics Science and Technology, pp

Blascheck, T., Beck, F., Baltes, S., Ertl, T., Weiskopf, D.: Visual analysis and coding of data- rich user behavior. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Visual Analytics Science and Technology, pp. 141–150 (2016)

2016
[7]

In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Big Data Visual Analytics, pp

Blascheck, T., Burch, M., Raschke, M., Weiskopf, D.: Challenges and perspectives in big eye- movement data visual analytics. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Big Data Visual Analytics, pp. 1–8 (2015)

2015
[8]

In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Beyond Time And Errors: Novel Evalu- ation Methods for Visualization (BELIV), pp

Blascheck, T., Ertl, T.: Towards analyzing eye tracking data for evaluating interactive visual- ization systems. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Beyond Time And Errors: Novel Evalu- ation Methods for Visualization (BELIV), pp. 70–77 (2014) Vis4Vis: Visualization for (Empiri...

2014
[9]

In: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Eye Tracking Research & Applications, pp

Blascheck, T., John, M., Koch, S., Bruder, L., Ertl, T.: Triangulating user behavior using eye movement, interaction, and think aloud data. In: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Eye Tracking Research & Applications, pp. 175–182 (2016)

2016
[10]

IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 22, 61–70 (2016)

Blascheck, T., John, M., Kurzhals, K., Koch, S., Ertl, T.: V A2: A visual analytics approach for evaluating visual analytics applications. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 22, 61–70 (2016)

2016
[11]

In: EuroVis – STARs, pp

Blascheck, T., Kurzhals, K., Raschke, M., Burch, M., Weiskopf, D., Ertl, T.: State-of-the-art of visualization for eye tracking data. In: EuroVis – STARs, pp. 63–82 (2014)

2014
[12]

Computer Graphics Forum36(8), 260–284 (2017)

Blascheck, T., Kurzhals, K., Raschke, M., Burch, M., Weiskopf, D., Ertl, T.: Visualization of eye tracking data: A taxonomy and survey. Computer Graphics Forum36(8), 260–284 (2017)

2017
[13]

In: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Eye Tracking Research & Applications, pp

Bruder, V ., Kurzhals, K., Frey, S., Weiskopf, D., Ertl, T.: Space-time volume visualization of gaze and stimulus. In: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Eye Tracking Research & Applications, pp. 12:1–12:9 (2019)

2019
[14]

IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics (2019)

Bruder, V ., M ¨uller, C., Frey, S., Ertl, T.: On evaluating runtime performance of interactive visualizations. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics (2019). DOI 10.1109/TVCG.2019.2898435

2019
[15]

IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelli- gence 33(4), 741–753 (2011)

Bulling, A., Ward, J.A., Gellersen, H., Troster, G.: Eye movement analysis for activity recog- nition using electrooculography. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelli- gence 33(4), 741–753 (2011)

2011
[17]

(eds.): Eye Tracking and Visu- alization: Foundations, Techniques, and Applications

Burch, M., Chuang, L., Fisher, B., Schmidt, A., Weiskopf, D. (eds.): Eye Tracking and Visu- alization: Foundations, Techniques, and Applications. Springer (2016)

2016
[18]

IEEE Transactions on Visual- ization and Computer Graphics 17(12), 2440–2448 (2011)

Burch, M., Konevtsova, N., Heinrich, J., H ¨oferlin, M., Weiskopf, D.: Evaluation of traditional, orthogonal, and radial tree diagrams by an eye tracking study. IEEE Transactions on Visual- ization and Computer Graphics 17(12), 2440–2448 (2011)

2011
[19]

Bylinskii, Z., Borkin, M.A.: Eye ﬁxation metrics for large scale analysis of information visu- alizations. In: M. Burch, L. Chuang, B. Fisher, A. Schmidt, D. Weiskopf (eds.) Eye Tracking and Visualization: Foundations, Techniques, and Applications, pp. 235–255. Springer (2016)

2016
[20]

Carpendale, S.: Evaluating information visualizations. In: A. Kerren, J.T. Stasko, J.D. Fekete, C. North (eds.) Information Visualization: Human-Centered Issues and Perspectives, pp. 19–
[21]

In: Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Information Visualization, pp

Chi, E.H.: A taxonomy of visualization techniques using the data state reference model. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Information Visualization, pp. 69–75 (2000)

2000
[22]

Dagstuhl Reports 8(6), 77–148 (2019)

Chuang, L., Duchowski, A., Qvarfordt, P., Weiskopf, D.: Ubiquitous gaze sensing and inter- action (Dagstuhl Seminar 18252). Dagstuhl Reports 8(6), 77–148 (2019)

2019
[23]

Cartography and Geographic Information Science 36(1), 5–17 (2009)

C ¸¨oltekin, A., Heil, B., Garlandini, S., Fabrikant, S.I.: Evaluating the effectiveness of inter- active map interface designs: a case study integrating usability metrics with eye-movement analysis. Cartography and Geographic Information Science 36(1), 5–17 (2009)

2009
[24]

SAGE Publications (2015)

Corbin, J., Strauss, A.: Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Devel- oping Grounded Theory, 4th edn. SAGE Publications (2015)

2015
[25]

ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 20(3), 13:1–13:4 (2013)

Crabtree, A., Chamberlain, A., Grinter, R.E., Jones, M., Rodden, T., Rogers, Y .: Introduc- tion to the special issue of ‘the turn to the wild’. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 20(3), 13:1–13:4 (2013)

2013
[26]

Neuroimage 54(4), 2808–2821 (2011)

Cui, X., Bray, S., Bryant, D.M., Glover, G.H., Reiss, A.L.: A quantitative comparison of NIRS and fMRI across multiple cognitive tasks. Neuroimage 54(4), 2808–2821 (2011)

2011
[27]

Springer (2007)

Duchowski, A.: Eye Tracking Methodology: Theory and Practice, 2nd edn. Springer (2007)

2007
[28]

In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Beyond Time And Errors: Novel Evaluation Methods for Visualization (BELIV), pp

Ellis, G., Dix, A.J.: An explorative analysis of user evaluation studies in information visu- alisation. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Beyond Time And Errors: Novel Evaluation Methods for Visualization (BELIV), pp. 1–7 (2006)

2006
[29]

In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Beyond Time And Errors: Novel Evaluation Methods for Visualization (BELIV), pp

Elmqvist, N., Yi, J.S.: Patterns for visualization evaluation. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Beyond Time And Errors: Novel Evaluation Methods for Visualization (BELIV), pp. 12:1– 12:8 (2012) 14 Daniel Weiskopf

2012
[30]

MIT Press (1993)

Ericsson, K.A., Simon, H.A.: Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data, revised edn. MIT Press (1993)

1993
[31]

In: Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Vision, pp

Fathi, A., Li, Y ., Rehg, J.M.: Learning to recognize daily actions using gaze. In: Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Vision, pp. 314–327. Springer (2012)

2012
[32]

Communications of the ACM 39(11), 27–34 (1996)

Fayyad, U., Piatetsky-Shapiro, G., Smyth, P.: The KDD process for extracting useful knowl- edge from volumes of data. Communications of the ACM 39(11), 27–34 (1996)

1996
[33]

Freitas, C.M.D.S., Pimenta, M.S., Scapin, D.L.: User-centered evaluation of information visu- alization techniques: Making the HCI-InfoVis connection explicit. In: W. Huang (ed.) Hand- book of Human Centric Visualization, pp. 315–336. Springer (2014)

2014
[34]

In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Beyond Time And Errors: Novel Evaluation Methods for Visualization (BELIV), pp

Goldberg, J.H., Helfman, J.I.: Comparing information graphics: a critical look at eye tracking. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Beyond Time And Errors: Novel Evaluation Methods for Visualization (BELIV), pp. 71–78 (2010)

2010
[35]

International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 28(5), 292–307 (2012)

G ¨urk¨ok, H., Nijholt, A.: Brain–computer interfaces for multimodal interaction: a survey and principles. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 28(5), 292–307 (2012)

2012
[36]

Haber, R.B., McNabb, D.A.: Visualization idioms: A conceptual model for visualization sys- tems. In: G.M. Nielson, B.D. Shriver, L.J. Rosenblum (eds.) Visualization in Scientiﬁc Com- puting, pp. 74–93. IEEE Computer Society Press (1990)

1990
[37]

In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Com- puting Systems, pp

Hirshﬁeld, L.M., Gulotta, R., Hirshﬁeld, S., Hincks, S., Russell, M., Ward, R., Williams, T., Jacob, R.: This is your brain on interfaces: enhancing usability testing with functional near- infrared spectroscopy. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Com-...

2011
[38]

Information Visualization 14(1), 10–26 (2015)

H ¨oferlin, B., H ¨oferlin, M., Heidemann, G., Weiskopf, D.: Scalable video visual analytics. Information Visualization 14(1), 10–26 (2015)

2015
[39]

Oxford University Press (2011)

Holmqvist, K., Nystr ¨om, M., Andersson, R., Dewhurst, R., Jarodzka, H., Van de Weijer, J.: Eye Tracking: A Comprehensive Guide to Methods and Measures. Oxford University Press (2011)

2011
[40]

IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics20(8), 1141– 1157 (2013)

Hurter, C., Ersoy, O., Fabrikant, S., Klein, T., Telea, A.: Bundled visualization of dynamic graph and trail data. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics20(8), 1141– 1157 (2013)

2013
[41]

MIT Press (1995)

Hutchins, E.: Cognition in the Wild. MIT Press (1995)

1995
[42]

IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 19(12), 2818–2827 (2013)

Isenberg, T., Isenberg, P., Chen, J., Sedlmair, M., M¨oller, T.: A systematic review on the prac- tice of evaluating visualization. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 19(12), 2818–2827 (2013)

2013
[43]

Jacob, R.J., Karn, K.S.: Eye tracking in human-computer interaction and usability research: Ready to deliver the promises. In: J. Hy ¨on¨a, R. Radach, H. Deubel (eds.) The Mind’s Eye: Cognitive and Applied Aspects of Eye Movement Research, pp. 573–605. Elsevier (2003)

2003
[44]

IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 24(3), 1232–1245 (2018)

Jianu, R., Alam, S.S.: A data model and task space for data of interest (DOI) eye-tracking anal- yses. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 24(3), 1232–1245 (2018)

2018
[45]

Journal of Mixed Methods Research 1(2), 112–133 (2007)

Johnson, R.B., Onwuegbuzie, A.J., Turner, L.A.: Toward a deﬁnition of mixed methods re- search. Journal of Mixed Methods Research 1(2), 112–133 (2007)

2007
[46]

IEEE Trans- actions Visualization Computer Graphics 18(12), 2421–2430 (2012)

Kim, S.H., Dong, Z., Xian, H., Upatising, B., Yi, J.S.: Does an eye tracker tell the truth about visualizations?: Findings while investigating visualizations for decision making. IEEE Trans- actions Visualization Computer Graphics 18(12), 2421–2430 (2012)

2012
[47]

In: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Eye Tracking Research & Applications, pp

Koch, M., Kurzhals, K., Weiskopf, D.: Image-based scanpath comparison with slit-scan visu- alization. In: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Eye Tracking Research & Applications, pp. 55:1–55:5 (2018)

2018
[48]

Kurzhals, K., Burch, M., Blascheck, T., Andrienko, G., Andrienko, N., Weiskopf, D.: A task- based view on the visual analysis of eye-tracking data. In: M. Burch, L. Chuang, B. Fisher, A. Schmidt, D. Weiskopf (eds.) Eye Tracking and Visualization: Foundations, Techniques, and A...

2016
[49]

In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Beyond Time And Errors: Novel Evaluation Methods for Visualization (BELIV), pp

Kurzhals, K., Fisher, B.D., Burch, M., Weiskopf, D.: Evaluating visual analytics with eye tracking. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Beyond Time And Errors: Novel Evaluation Methods for Visualization (BELIV), pp. 61–69 (2014)

2014
[50]

Information Visualization 15(4), 340–358 (2016) Vis4Vis: Visualization for (Empirical) Visualization Research 15

Kurzhals, K., Fisher, B.D., Burch, M., Weiskopf, D.: Eye tracking evaluation of visual analyt- ics. Information Visualization 15(4), 340–358 (2016) Vis4Vis: Visualization for (Empirical) Visualization Research 15

2016
[51]

In: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Eye Tracking Research & Applications, pp

Kurzhals, K., Heimerl, F., Weiskopf, D.: ISeeCube: Visual analysis of gaze data for video. In: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Eye Tracking Research & Applications, pp. 43–50 (2014)

2014
[52]

IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 23(1), 301–310 (2017)

Kurzhals, K., Hlawatsch, M., Seeger, C., Weiskopf, D.: Visual analytics for mobile eye track- ing. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 23(1), 301–310 (2017)

2017
[53]

IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 19(12), 2129–2138 (2013)

Kurzhals, K., Weiskopf, D.: Space-time visual analytics of eye-tracking data for dynamic stim- uli. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 19(12), 2129–2138 (2013)

2013
[54]

IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 18(9), 1520–1536 (2012)

Lam, H., Bertini, E., Isenberg, P., Plaisant, C., Carpendale, S.: Empirical studies in information visualization: Seven scenarios. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 18(9), 1520–1536 (2012)

2012
[55]

In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Beyond Time And Errors: Novel Evaluation Methods for Visualization (BELIV) (2008)

Lam, H., Munzner, T.: Increasing the utility of quantitative empirical studies for meta-analysis. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Beyond Time And Errors: Novel Evaluation Methods for Visualization (BELIV) (2008). Article No. 2

2008
[56]

In: Proceedings of the International Conference for High Perfor- mance Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis, pp

Larsen, M., Harrison, C., Kress, J., Pugmire, D., Meredith, J.S., Childs, H.: Performance mod- eling of in situ rendering. In: Proceedings of the International Conference for High Perfor- mance Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis, pp. 276–287 (2016)

2016
[57]

Cambridge University Press (1988)

Lave, J.: Cognition in Practice. Cambridge University Press (1988)

1988
[58]

IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications 35(5), 84–90 (2015)

Lee, B., Henry Riche, N., Isenberg, P., Carpendale, S.: More than telling a story: Transforming data into visually shared stories. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications 35(5), 84–90 (2015)

2015
[59]

IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications 32(1), 12–19 (2012)

Ma, K., Liao, I., Frazier, J., Hauser, H., Kostis, H.: Scientiﬁc storytelling using visualization. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications 32(1), 12–19 (2012)

2012
[60]

(eds.): Immersive Analytics

Marriott, K., Schreiber, F., Dwyer, T., Klein, K., Riche, N.H., Itoh, T., Stuerzlinger, W., Thomas, B.H. (eds.): Immersive Analytics. Springer (2018)

2018
[61]

Journal of Eye Movement Research 12(6) (2019)

Munz, T., Chuang, L., Pannasch, S., Weiskopf, D.: VisME: visual microsaccades explorer. Journal of Eye Movement Research 12(6) (2019). DOI 10.16910/jemr.12.6.5

2019 doi
[62]

IEEE Transac- tions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 25(1), 87–97 (2019)

Muthumanickam, P.K., Vrotsou, K., Nordman, A., Johansson, J., Cooper, M.D.: Identiﬁcation of temporally varying areas of interest in long-duration eye-tracking data sets. IEEE Transac- tions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 25(1), 87–97 (2019)

2019
[65]

IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications 26(3), 6–9 (2006)

North, C.: Toward measuring visualization insight. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications 26(3), 6–9 (2006)

2006
[66]

Computer 43(12), 86–89 (2010)

Peck, E.M., Solovey, E.T., Chauncey, K., Sassaroli, A., Fantini, S., Jacob, R.J.K., Girouard, A., Hirshﬁeld, L.M.: Your brain, your computer, and you. Computer 43(12), 86–89 (2010)

2010
[67]

In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligence Analysis, vol

Pirolli, P., Card, S.: The sensemaking process and leverage points for analyst technology as identiﬁed through cognitive task analysis. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligence Analysis, vol. 5, pp. 2–4 (2005)

2005
[68]

In: Proceedings of the Working Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces, pp

Plaisant, C.: The challenge of information visualization evaluation. In: Proceedings of the Working Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces, pp. 109–116 (2004)

2004
[69]

International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 62(2), 231–245 (2005)

Prendinger, H., Mori, J., Ishizuka, M.: Using human physiology to evaluate subtle expressivity of a virtual quizmaster in a mathematical game. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 62(2), 231–245 (2005)

2005
[70]

In: Proceedings of the Eurographics Symposium on Parallel Graphics and Visualization, pp

Rizzi, S., Hereld, M., Insley, J., Papka, M.E., Uram, T., Vishwanath, V .: Performance mod- eling of vl3 volume rendering on GPU-based clusters. In: Proceedings of the Eurographics Symposium on Parallel Graphics and Visualization, pp. 65–72 (2014)

2014
[71]

In: Pro- ceedings of the International Conference on Coordinated and Multiple Views in Exploratory Visualization, pp

Roberts, J.C.: State of the art: Coordinated multiple views in exploratory visualization. In: Pro- ceedings of the International Conference on Coordinated and Multiple Views in Exploratory Visualization, pp. 61–71 (2007)

2007
[72]

SAGE Publications (2015) 16 Daniel Weiskopf

Saldana, J.: The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers, 3rd edn. SAGE Publications (2015) 16 Daniel Weiskopf

2015
[73]

In: Proceedings of the Work- shop on Beyond Time And Errors: Novel Evaluation Methods for Visualization (BELIV), pp

Schulz, C., Nocaj, A., El-Assady, M., Frey, S., Hlawatsch, M., Hund, M., Karch, G.K., Netzel, R., Sch ¨atzle, C., Butt, M., Keim, D.A., Ertl, T., Brandes, U., Weiskopf, D.: Generative data models for validation and evaluation of visualization techniques. In: Proceedings of the...

2016
[74]

In: Proceedings of the ACM Workshop on Exploratory Search and Interactive Data Analytics, pp

Shao, L., Silva, N., Eggeling, E., Schreck, T.: Visual exploration of large scatter plot matrices by pattern recommendation based on eye tracking. In: Proceedings of the ACM Workshop on Exploratory Search and Interactive Data Analytics, pp. 9–16 (2017)

2017
[75]

In: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Eye Tracking Research & Applica- tions, pp

Silva, N., Blascheck, T., Jianu, R., Rodrigues, N., Weiskopf, D., Raubal, M., Schreck, T.: Eye tracking support for visual analytics systems: foundations, current applications, and research challenges. In: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Eye Tracking Research & Applica- ti...

2019
[76]

In: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Eye Tracking Research & Applications (2018)

Silva, N., Schreck, T., Veas, E., Sabol, V ., Eggeling, E., Fellner, D.W.: Leveraging eye-gaze and time-series features to predict user interests and build a recommendation model for visual analysis. In: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Eye Tracking Research & Applications ...

2018
[77]

In: Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, pp

Steichen, B., Carenini, G., Conati, C.: User-adaptive information visualization: using eye gaze data to infer visualization tasks and user cognitive abilities. In: Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, pp. 317–328 (2013)

2013
[78]

In: CHI ’14 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp

Strait, M., Canning, C., Scheutz, M.: Reliability of NIRS-based BCIs: A placebo-controlled replication and reanalysis of Brainput. In: CHI ’14 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 619–630 (2014)

2014
[79]

Cambridge University Press (1987)

Suchman, L.A.: Plans and Situated Actions: The Problem of Human-Machine Communica- tion. Cambridge University Press (1987)

1987
[80]

Tory, M.: User studies in visualization: A reﬂection on methods. In: W. Huang (ed.) Handbook of Human Centric Visualization, pp. 411–426. Springer (2014)

2014
[81]

(eds.): Proceedings of LIVVIL: Logging Interactive Visualizations and Visualizing Interaction Logs (2016)

Vuillemot, R., Boy, J., Tabard, A., Perin, C., Fekete, J.D. (eds.): Proceedings of LIVVIL: Logging Interactive Visualizations and Visualizing Interaction Logs (2016). Workshop at IEEE VIS 2016, https://hal.inria.fr/hal-01535913/file/proceedings. pdf

2016
[82]

In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo, pp

Wagner, J., Kim, J., Andr ´e, E.: From physiological signals to emotions: Implementing and comparing selected methods for feature extraction and classiﬁcation. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo, pp. 940–943 (2005)

2005
[83]

IEEE Computer 46(7), 56–60 (2013)

van Wijk, J.J.: Evaluation: A challenge for visual analytics. IEEE Computer 46(7), 56–60 (2013)

2013

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [64]

Visual Informatics1(2), 118– 131 (2017)

Netzel, R., Vuong, J., Engelke, U., O’Donoghue, S.I., Weiskopf, D., Heinrich, J.: Comparative eye-tracking evaluation of scatterplots and parallel coordinates. Visual Informatics1(2), 118– 131 (2017)

work page 2017

[2] [63]

Spatial Cognition & Computation 17(1-2), 39–64 (2017)

Netzel, R., Ohlhausen, B., Kurzhals, K., Woods, R., Burch, M., Weiskopf, D.: User perfor- mance and reading strategies for metro maps: An eye tracking study. Spatial Cognition & Computation 17(1-2), 39–64 (2017)

work page 2017

[3] [16]

In: Proceedings of the IEEE Paciﬁc Visualization Symposium, pp

Burch, M., Andrienko, G.L., Andrienko, N.V ., H ¨oferlin, M., Raschke, M., Weiskopf, D.: Vi- sual task solution strategies in tree diagrams. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Paciﬁc Visualization Symposium, pp. 169–176 (2013)

work page 2013

[4] [1]

In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Beyond Time And Errors: Novel Evaluation Methods for Visualization (BE- LIV), pp

Anderson, E.W.: Evaluating visualization using cognitive measures. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Beyond Time And Errors: Novel Evaluation Methods for Visualization (BE- LIV), pp. 1–4 (2012)

2012

[5] [2]

Computer Graphics Forum 30(3), 791–800 (2011)

Anderson, E.W., Potter, K.C., Matzen, L.E., Shepherd, J.F., Preston, G.A., Silva, C.T.: A user study of visualization effectiveness using EEG and cognitive load. Computer Graphics Forum 30(3), 791–800 (2011)

2011

[6] [3]

IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 18(12), 2889–2898 (2012)

Andrienko, G.L., Andrienko, N.V ., Burch, M., Weiskopf, D.: Visual analytics methodology for eye movement studies. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 18(12), 2889–2898 (2012)

2012

[7] [4]

Beck, F., Blascheck, T., Ertl, T., Weiskopf, D.: Exploring word-sized graphics for visualiz- ing eye tracking data within transcribed experiment recordings. In: M. Burch, L. Chuang, B. Fisher, A. Schmidt, D. Weiskopf (eds.) Eye Tracking and Visualization: Foundations, Tech- niques, and Applications, pp. 113–128. Springer (2016)

work page 2016

[8] [5]

IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 22(1), 180–189 (2016)

Beck, F., Koch, S., Weiskopf, D.: Visual analysis and dissemination of scientiﬁc literature collections with SurVis. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 22(1), 180–189 (2016)

work page 2016