![[Improving public understanding]
• Content – Risk Communication & Mental Models and HCI
testing](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/datavisualisationforpublicengagement-140516045824-phpapp02/85/SCC-2014-Data-visualisation-for-public-engagement-24-320.jpg)
![[Trust Guidelines - 5 design dimensions]
User Interface
Map/ Spatial
Visualisation
component
Graphic Structure Content Functionality
Menu should
match popular
menu
visualisations.
Distinct colours
should be used
or shades of
blue if this not
possible.
Map larger than
388x589 pix.
Trust Cues
Provide a map
tutorial below the
map
Visible logos
from all pages
Provide a blog
….
Skarlatidou, A., Cheng, T. and Haklay, M.(2013) Guidelines for Trust Interface Design for
Public Engagement Web GIS, International Journal of GIScience, 257,8, pp. 1668-1687.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/datavisualisationforpublicengagement-140516045824-phpapp02/85/SCC-2014-Data-visualisation-for-public-engagement-26-320.jpg)
SCC 2014 - Data visualisation for public engagement
- 1. Data Visualisation for Public Engagement Damien George, Andrew Steele, Artemis Skarlatidou Chair: Martin Zaltz Austwick 1
- 2. Data Visualisation for Public Engagement Martin Zaltz Austwick, Course Director MRes Advanced Spatial Analysis and Visualisation CASA, Bartlett Faculty of the Built Environment, UCL 2
- 3. Damien George Cavendish Laboratory, Cambridge paperscape.org thecmb.org 3
- 4. The Scienceogram Making sense of science spending scienceogram.org @scienceogram Andrew Steele
- 5. social protection £3900 healthcare £1900 education £1000 defence £700 other £3500 research £160 £695bn government spend £11,000 per person 63m population =
- 6. causes of death research spend per person per year cancer 30% £4.30 stroke 10% heart disease 15% 28p £1.30
- 8. Nuclear fusion • Hasn’t that been 30 years away for the last 30 years? • Hasn’t that been 50 years away for the last 50 years? • Hasn’t that been 30 years away for the last 50 years?
- 9. £60bn develop fusion 1.1bn population of high-income countries £50 per person =
- 11. fusion (projected) £60,000,000,000 iPhone revenue £123,000,000,000 iPhone profit £65,000,000,000 LHC £2,600,000,000 Crossrail £14,800,000,000
- 12. fusion (projected) £60,000,000,000 iPhone revenue £123,000,000,000 iPhone profit £65,000,000,000 LHC £2,600,000,000 Crossrail £14,800,000,000
- 14. Put data in context Meaningful figures Meaningful categories Meaningful comparisons scienceogram.org @scienceogram
- 15. The Scienceogram Making sense of science spending scienceogram.org @scienceogram Andrew Steele andrewsteele.co.uk @statto Tom Fuller
- 16. trust User Issues: spatial visualisations for public engagement Dr Artemis Skarlatidou Extreme Citizen Science Group www.ucl.ac.uk/excites a.skarlatidou@ucl.ac.uk Science Communication | Data Visualisation | 1 May 2014
- 17. Public Engagement and Spatial Visualisations • “Almost everything that happens, happens somewhere…” (Longley, 2005) • From cave drawings of spatial representations to online maps that are used by almost everyone (with internet access) and everywhere..! • Human spatial ability? – People trust (i.e. rely on) maps more than their spatial cognition and ability to navigate and – People trust maps more than other types of data visualisation despite the fact that all maps lie (Monmonier, 1996) • PPGIS studies claim that “cultivate a stronger sense of commitment, increase user satisfaction, create realistic expectations of outcomes and build trust” (Al-Kodmany, 1999); allow for integration of indigenous knowledge with expert data (Dunn, 2007)...
- 18. Engaging the public using maps (provision of information)
- 19. Engaging the public using maps (contribution and analysis of information)
- 20. Engaging the public using maps (analysing information – make and submit decision)
- 21. But what about the users? • Is it easy to use? • Is it trustworthy? • Is it useful? • Do people understand it? Do they like it? • ….does it meet its purpose? • Other user issues such as: Public familiarity and expertise in spatial data handling and analysis etc?
- 22. • Public engagement to: – improve transparency and build trust – understand the problem and resolve NIMBY-type conflicts and potentially find a solution – very limited public knowledge of nuclear & nuclear waste disposal issues… improve public understanding The Nuclear Waste Disposal example
- 24. [Improving public understanding] • Content – Risk Communication & Mental Models and HCI testing
- 25. Improving Trust / Helping people develop rational trust perceptions • Trust Design – Trustee attributes – Functional attributes (e.g. usability, aesthetics) – Perceptual attributes (e.g. reputation of the source) – trust cues (e.g. logos, pictures, videos, blogs)
- 26. [Trust Guidelines - 5 design dimensions] User Interface Map/ Spatial Visualisation component Graphic Structure Content Functionality Menu should match popular menu visualisations. Distinct colours should be used or shades of blue if this not possible. Map larger than 388x589 pix. Trust Cues Provide a map tutorial below the map Visible logos from all pages Provide a blog …. Skarlatidou, A., Cheng, T. and Haklay, M.(2013) Guidelines for Trust Interface Design for Public Engagement Web GIS, International Journal of GIScience, 257,8, pp. 1668-1687.
- 27. colours
- 28. colours
- 29. legend
- 30. map size
- 32. Different structure similar to Health Physics Society on Radioactive Waste Disposal Website structure Mental models structure
- 33. Testing and extending the guidelines on other contexts • communicating clearly data generalisation issues • Perceived usefulness … ? ?
- 34. Aesthetics This is a Van Gogh! …and this is a Matisse!!! Fabrikant et al. (2012) Emotional response to map design aesthetics. In: GIScience 2012: Seventh International Conference on Geographic Information Science, Columbus, Ohio, 18 September 2012 - 21 September 2012.