KIM HENZE

PART 1: GOOD VISUALIZATION

This interactive spatial visualization does a lot of things very well. First, by placing the geographical information on a map, we're able to read and see patterns without having to think relationally about spatial data given in textual/graphical form in a table or on a graph. Second, the variable (other than space) that's really important to the main message of the map is color -- which is a pre-attentive attribute. This is a particularly good use of color because there are only 5 variables; keeping with the knowledge that the human brain can only handle around 10-12 of these kinds of variables, we're well within easy-comprehension range. With these pre-attentive colors, we notice gatherings and separations very easily.

We can then re-orient these two factors (the spatial and color [race/census group]) by doing a simple zoom in or out of the interface (I took the topmost screenshot then zoomed out to the lower screenshot) and understand those color relations on different levels. The interactivity of the bottom bar -- where you can switch which metropolitan area you're viewing -- allows for quick and singular viewing of each city following the same spatial and color variables you've already "captured" in your head. These makes for a relatively invisible interface -- our focus is not drawn away from the data by an over-complex or richly-designed apparatus.

At any point, you can also hover over the visualization with your mouse to read data specifics for census tracts, which you are given as spatial boundaries and can thus easily relate to its neighbors.

PART 2: BAD VISUALIZATIONS

2a) Dinner Takeout, USA Today

This graph isn't great for cognitive perception because, as a pie graph, it relies more on angles than on position or length. There is also no splitting of the sections by color to distinguish one from another. Another cognitively-troubling distortion is that the flat circle of the pizza is shown at an angle, so the flat surface represented is actually an ellipse and not a circle -- which plays with our comprehension of the pie pieces a little bit.

2b) Who Eats the Most Pasta, USA Today

While this visualization uses length/position (bar graph) rather than angles (like the pie chart above), it's still not great for cognitive reading because it doesn't take advantage of color differences -- in fact, the color distinction (that I eventually realized is supposed to be pasta sauce) looks like it might have some sort of meaning, but it actually doesn't at all. Additionally, the graph incorporates spatial data (countries) that could have been exhibited more readily on some sort of mapped surface rather than written out in textual form.

PART 3: BOTANICAL TREE

Three-dimensional space is rendered convincingly with depth cues: both shading from a light source (visible at the trunk of fig. 12) as well as shading/shadows from other branches that block a light source (middle right of fig. 13). Additionally, color (pre-attentive) seems to get both darker/further from a yellow-orange as the branches reach out from the trunk. Length of the branches becomes more difficult to read because the branches are not extending from one base zero line (you'd have to read angles rather than lengths, which is more difficult). However the three-dimensional rendering and foreshortening still give me a strong *sense* of the tree's shape (I understand its tree/hierarchy structure), even if I can't readily compare branch lengths. I also quickly comprehend the difference between nodes by their texture of suction-like cones; the texture of many and small cones is easily differentiated from the nodes with larger and fewer cones -- which might tell me that there's more bits of information on the tightly-textured node/fruit.

*I have neither given nor received aid while working on this assignment. I have completed the graded portion before looking at anyone else's work on this assignment. Signed Kim Henze.