In an observational study, we noticed that record-keeping plays a critical role in the overall process of collaborative visual data analysis. Record-keeping involves recording material for later use, ranging from data about the visual analysis processes and visualization states to notes and annotations that externalize user insights, findings, and hypotheses. In our study, co-located teams worked on collaborative visual analytics tasks using large interactive wall and tabletop displays. Part of our findings is a collaborative data analysis framework that encompasses record-keeping as one of the main activities. In this paper, our primary focus is on note-taking activity. Based on our observations, we characterize notes according to their content, scope, and usage, and describe how they fit into a process of collaborative data analysis. We then discuss suggestions to improve the design of note-taking functionality for co-located collaborative visual analytics tools.
LipfordHRStukesFDouW. et al. Helping users recall their reasoning process. In: Visual analytics science and technology (VAST). Salt Lake City, UT, 2010, pp.187–194. New York: IEEE.
2.
HeerJvan HamFCarpendaleS. et al. Creation and collaboration: engaging new audiences for information visualization. Inf Visual2008; 4950: 92–133.
3.
IsenbergPCarpendaleS. Interactive tree comparison for co-located collaborative information visualization. IEEE Trans Visual Comput Graphics2007; 13(6): 1232–1239.
4.
RogersYLindleyS. Collaborating around large interactive displays: which way is best to meet. Interact Comput2004; 16(6): 1133–1152.
5.
ForlinesCEsentherAShenC. et al. Multi-user, multidisplay interaction with a single-user, single-display geospatial application. In: Proceedings of ACM symposium on user interface software and technology, Montreux, Switzerland, 15 October 2006, pp.273–276. New York: ACM.
6.
ForlinesCShenC. DTLens: multi-user tabletop spatial data exploration. In: Proceedings of ACM symposium on user interface software and technology, Seattle, WA, USA, 23 October 2005, pp.119–122. New York: ACM.
7.
IsenbergPFisherD. Collaborative brushing and linking for co-located visual analytics of document collections. Comput Graphics Forum2009; 28(3): 1031–1038.
8.
TobiaszMIsenbergPCarpendaleS. Lark: coordinating co-located collaboration with information visualization. IEEE Trans Visual Comput Graphics2009; 15(6): 1065–1072.
9.
VernierFLeshNShenC. Visualization techniques for circular tabletop interfaces. In: Proceedings of the working conference on advanced visual interfaces, Trento, Italy, 22 May 2002, pp.257–265. New York: ACM.
10.
HeerJMackinlayJStolteC. et al. Graphical histories for visualization: supporting analysis, communication, and evaluation. IEEE Trans Visual Comput Graphics2008; 14(6): 1189–1196.
11.
ShrinivasanYBGotzyDLuJ. Connecting the dots in visual analysis. In: IEEE symposium on visual analytics science and technology, Atlantic City, NJ, USA, 12 Oct 2009, pp.123–130. New York: IEEE.
12.
ViegasFBWattenbergMvan HamF. et al. ManyEyes: a site for visualization at internet scale. IEEE Trans Visual Comput Graphics2007; 13(6): 1121–1128.
13.
MahyarNSarvghadAToryM. A closer look at note taking in the co-located collaborative visual analytics process. In: Proceedings of IEEE conference on visual analytics science and technology (VAST 10), Salt Lake City, UT, 25 Oct 2010, pp.171–178. New York: IEEE.
TangAToryMPoB. et al. Collaborative coupling over tabletop displays. In: Proceedings of the conference on human factors in computing systems, CHI 2006, Montréal, Canada, 22–27 April 2006, pp.1181–1190. New York: ACM.
16.
IsenbergPTangACarpendaleS. An exploratory study of co-located collaborative visual analytics around a tabletop display. In: Proceedings of the conference on human factors in computing systems, CHI 2008, Florence, Italy, 5–10 April 2008, pp.1217–1226. New York: ACM.
17.
CardSMackinlayJDShneidermanB. Readings in information visualization: using vision to think. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kauffman, 1999.
18.
MarkGKobsaA. The effects of collaboration and system transparency on CIVE usage: an empirical study and model. Presence Teleop Virt Environ2005; 14(1): 60–80.
19.
ParkKSKapoorALeighJ. Lessons learned from employing multiple perspectives in a collaborative virtual environment for visualizing scientific data. In: Proceedings of conference on collaborative virtual environments, San Francisco, California, USA, 10 September 2000, pp.73–82. New York: ACM.
20.
RobinsonAC. Collaborative synthesis of visual analytic results. In: IEEE symposium on visual analytics science and technology, Columbus, Ohio, USA, 19 October 2008, pp.67–74. New York: IEEE.
21.
ScottSDGrantKDMandrykRL. System guidelines for co-located, collaborative work on a tabletop display. In: Proceedings of conference on computer supported cooperative work, Helsinki, Finland, 14 September 2003, pp.159–178. Norwell, MA: Kluwer.
ShneidermanB. The eyes have it: a task by data type taxonomy for information visualizations. In: Proceedings of IEEE symposium on visual languages, Boulder, CO, USA, 3 September 1996, pp.336–343. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE CS Press.
25.
MengCYasueMImamiyaA. et al. Visualizing histories for selective undo and redo. In: Proceedings of Asia Pacific computer human interaction, Kangawa, Japan, 15 July 1998, pp.459–464. New York: IEEE.
26.
O’HaraKSellenA. A comparison of reading paper and on-line documents. In: Proceedings of the human factors in computing systems, Atlanta, Georgia, USA, 22 March 1997, pp.335–342. New York: ACM.
27.
OinnTAddisMFerrisJ. et al. Taverna: a tool for the composition and enactment of bioinformatics workflows. Bioinformatics2004; 20(17): 3045–3054.
28.
GutwinCGreenbergS. Design for individuals, design for groups: tradeoffs between power and workspace awareness. In: Proceedings of computer supported cooperative work (CSCW), Seattle, Washington, USA, 14 November 1998, pp.207–216. New York: ACM.
29.
MarkGCarpenterKKobsaA. A model of synchronous collaborative information visualization. In: Proceedings of information visualization, London, UK, 16 July 2003, pp.373–381. Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society.
30.
SarvghadAMahyarNToryM. History tools for collaborative visualization. In: Proceedings of workshop on collaborative visualization on interactive surfaces (CoVIS), Atlantic City, USA, 22 October 2009, pp.21–23. New York: IEEE.
31.
HartleyJ. Notetaking in non-academic settings: a review. Appl Cognit Psychol2002; 16(5): 559–574.
32.
BochFPiolatA. Note taking and learning: a summary of research. WAC J2005; 16: 101–113.
33.
BretzingB. Notetaking and depth of processing. Contemp Educ Psychol1979; 4(2): 145–153.
34.
IsenbergTNeumannPCarpendaleS. et al. Interactive annotations on large, high-resolution information displays. In: Proceedings of the IEEE VIS/InfoVis/VAST, Los Alamitos, CA, 29 October 2006, pp.124–125. New York: IEEE.
35.
KadivarNChenVDunsmuirD. et al. Capturing and supporting the analysis process. In: IEEE Symposium on visual analytics science and technology, Atlantic City, USA, 22 October 2009, pp.131–138. New York: IEEE.
ShrinivasanYBvan WijkJJ. Supporting the analytical reasoning process in information visualization. In: Proceedings of human factors in computing systems (CHI 08), Florence, Italy, 5 April 2008, pp.1237–1246. New York: ACM.
38.
EllisSEGrothDP. A collaborative annotation system for data visualization. In: Proceedings of the working conference on advanced visual interfaces, Gallipoli, Italy, 25 May 2004, pp.411–414. New York: ACM.
39.
GotzDZhouMAggarwalV. Interactive visual synthesis of analytic knowledge. In: 2006 IEEE symposium on visual analytics and technology, Baltimore, MD, USA, 31 October 2006, pp.51–58. New York: IEEE.
ScottSDSheelaghMCarpendaleT. et al. Territoriality in collaborative tabletop workspaces. In: Proceedings of conference on computer supported cooperative work, Chicago, Illinois, USA, 16 November 2004, pp.294–303. New York: ACM.
42.
Jankun-KellyTJMaK-LGertzM. A model and framework for visualization exploration. IEEE Trans Visual Comput Graphics2007; 13(2): 357–369.
43.
KiewraKABentonSLKimS. et al. Effects of note-taking format and study technique on recall and relational performance. Contemp Educ Psychol1995; 20: 172–187.
44.
MaquilVPsikTWagnerI. The ColorTable: a design story. In: Proceedings of tangible and embedded interaction, Bonn, Germany, 18 February 2008, pp.97–104. New York: ACM.
45.
SellenAJHarperRH. The myth of the paperless office. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2003.
46.
TerrenghiLKirkDSellenA. et al. Affordances for manipulation of physical versus digital media on interactive surfaces. In: Proceedings of human factors in computing systems, San Jose, California, USA, 28 April 2007, pp.1157–1166. New York: ACM.
47.
SimmelG. The number of members as determining the sociological form of the group. Am J Sociol1902; 8: 1–46.
