skip to main content
10.1145/989863.989885acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesaviConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

ValueCharts: analyzing linear models expressing preferences and evaluations

Authors Info & Claims
Published:25 May 2004Publication History

ABSTRACT

In this paper we propose ValueCharts, a set of visualizations and interactive techniques intended to support decision-makers in inspecting linear models of preferences and evaluation. Linear models are popular decision-making tools for individuals, groups and organizations. In Decision Analysis, they help the decision-maker analyze preferential choices under conflicting objectives. In Economics and the Social Sciences, similar models are devised to rank entities according to an evaluative index of interest. The fundamental goal of building models expressing preferences and evaluations is to help the decision-maker organize all the information relevant to a decision into a structure that can be effectively analyzed. However, as models and their domain of application grow in complexity, model analysis can become a very challenging task. We claim that ValueCharts will make the inspection and application of these models more natural and effective. We support our claim by showing how ValueCharts effectively enable a set of basic tasks that we argue are at the core of analyzing and understanding linear models of preferences and evaluation.

References

  1. Asahi, T., D. Turo, and B. Shneiderman, Using Treemaps to visualize the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Information Systems Research, 1995. 6(4): p. 357--375.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Blythe, J. Visual Exploration and Incremental Utility Elicitation. in AAAI-02. 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Bertin, J., Semiology of Graphics. 1983. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Card, S. K., J. D. Mackinlay, and B. Shneiderman, Readings in Information Visualization - Using Vision to Think. 1999: Morgan Kaufmann. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Clemen, R. T., Making Hard Decisions: an introduction to decision analysis. 1996, Belmont, California: Duxbury Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Dyer, J. S., Remarks on the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Management Science, 1990. 36(3): p. 249--258. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Hammond, J. S., R. Keeney, and H. Raiffa, Smart Choices: a practical guide to making better decisions. 1999: Harvard Business School Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Keeney, R. and H. Raiffa, Decision with multiple objectives: Preferences and value tradeoffs. 1976: Cambridge University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Keeney, R. L., Value-Focused Thinking: A Path to Creative Decision Making. 1992: Harvard University Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Kosslyn, S. M., Elements of Graph design. 1994.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Payne, J. W., J. R. Bettman, and D. A. Schkade, Measuring Constructed Preference: Towards a Building Code. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 1999. 19(1): p. 243--270.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Pu, P. and B. Faltings. Enriching buyers' experiences: the SmartClient approach. in CHI. 2000. The Hague, Amsterdam: ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Rao, R. and S. K. Card, The Table Lens: Merging Graphical and Symbolic Representation in an Interactive Focus+Context Visualization for tabular Information, in Proceedings of the CHI '94 Conference. 1994: Boston, MA, USA. p. 318--322. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Saaty, T. L., The Analytic Hierarchy Process. 1980, New York: McGraw-Hill.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Spence, R. and L. Tweedie, The Attribute Explorer: information synthesis via exploration. Interacting with Computers, 1998. 11: p. 137--146.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Todd, P. and I. Benbasat, An Experimental investigation of the Impact of Computer Based Decision Aids on Decision making Strategies. Information Systems Research, 1991. 2(2): p. 87--115.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Todd, P. and I. Benbasat, Inducing Compensatory Information Processing through Decision Aids that Facilitate Effort Reduction: An Experimental Assessment. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 2000. 13: p. 91--106.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Williamson, C. and B. Shneiderman. The Dynamic HomeFinder: Evaluating Dynamic Queries in a Real-Estate Information Exploration System. in ACM SIGIR. 1992. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Wittenburg, K., T. Lanning, M. Heinrichs, and M. Stanton. Parallel Bargrams for Consumer-based Information Exploration and Choice. in UIST. 2001. Orlando, FL. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. ValueCharts: analyzing linear models expressing preferences and evaluations

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          AVI '04: Proceedings of the working conference on Advanced visual interfaces
          May 2004
          425 pages
          ISBN:1581138679
          DOI:10.1145/989863

          Copyright © 2004 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 25 May 2004

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • Article

          Acceptance Rates

          Overall Acceptance Rate107of408submissions,26%

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader