1. DATABASE GRAPHICAL USER INTERFACE WITH FISHEYE TECHNOLOGY Agency Columbia Center for New Media Teaching and Learning CCNMTL Title: Visual Interface Evaluation New Systems of Access in Data for The Digital Government Research Center (DGRC) Title PresentersPeter SommerJu-Ling ShihLaura Zadoff DateMonth Jan.. Feb.. March April May Day 1 2 3 4 5 Present to DGRC Evaluation Board at Columbia University Applet CSEDS

5. Methodology Flowchart - Past Start of DGRC Project (Link)(Link) First DGRC Interface: Original Interface (Link)(Link) Second DGRC Interface: Fisheye Interface (Link)(Link) Analysis of DataGate Interface (Link)(Link) Interview of Experts (Link)(Link)  Define Users  User Needs, Behaviors, Preferences, Reactions Stage One Development of Evaluation Plan (Link)(Link) Evaluation Started Timeline Fall 1999 Fall 2001 Responses To Fisheye Interface (Link)(Link)

6. Methodology Flowchart - Present Resource Analysis on Census Data (Link)(Link) Interview Experts for Census Data Analysis Fisheye Interface Research Innovative Designs with Fisheye Applications Componential Analysis on Fisheye Features (Link) User and Environment Profiles Design User and Task Analysis In Progress Timeline Spring 2002 Present Stage Two Formative-Illuminative Evaluation (Link)(Link) Refine Heuristics for GUI Census Characteristics and Interface Possibilities (Link) (Link)

7. Methodology Flowchart - Future Summative Evaluation With Questionnaire Prototype Testing Usability Testing Perform User and Task Analysis Think Aloud Interview with Heuristics Timeline Fall 2002 Stage Three Development of Future Plans (Link)(Link)

8. About the Project  Project Description Video Clip Project Description (Judith Klavans) Rationale for Evaluation (Judith Klavans)  Project Presentation Video Clip Project Presentation (Surabhan Temiyabutr) Screen Shot Old DGUI New DGUI Gummy Bear Show Websites DGUI Old Gummy Bear Show Colorful Gummy Bear Show

9. Development of Evaluation Plan  Goals of Evaluation optimize the effectiveness of the interface, identify usability problems, provide feedback on the overall functionality, anticipate changes in user need that might drive future development, validate the design, indicate the extent to which the interface improves on previous interfaces.  Methods Heuristics User and Task Analysis

10. Heuristics for Database Interface Usability inspection method targeting interface design by judging compliances to principles for successful design.  Design Adapted from existing research on interface design Modified for Database  Heuristic categories Appearance, Language, Functionality, Structure, Assistance  Evaluators Library Staff

11. User and Task Analysis  Process Task Scenarios Observation Interview  Goal User Behaviors User Intuitiveness for Different Groups of Users Strengths and Weaknesses of the Design  Participants Content Experts Government Agency Workers Faculty and Students

12. Responses To Fisheye Interface  Interviewees: EDS librarians Jane Weintrop Nicole Fox Reference Desk librarians Jerry Breeze Alysse Jordan

13. Analysis of DataGate Interface  Purpose Understand User Behaviors with Database  Query Log Analysis of EDS DataGate by Nicole Fox Flexibility in Choosing Variables Options to Sets of Variables Options to Adjust Individual Variable Keyword Search: Search Methods and Syntax “All” vs. “Any” “And” vs. “Or” Modification of Queries From General to Specific From Specific to General

14. Interview Findings  User Type Identification  User Goals  Kinds of Questions  Brief History of Search  Types of Searches  Related Terms for Searches  Selecting the database  Learning to Use the Interface  Students’ Searching Styles  Searching Styles of Fisheye Design  Flexibility to Searching Styles  Helping the User Define the Search  Standardize Problem  Librarians’ Duty  Suggestions for the Fisheye Design

15. Interview Findings  User Type Identification Novice and Power/Expert Users  Related Terms for Searches Difficulty of Use of Alternative Terms  Learning to Use the Interface Innovative Interface Need Orientation and Time to Familiarize with the Interface  Helping the User Define the Search Help users to Visualize the Context and Structure of Information Definition and Redefinition of Search [These issues need to be considered in all rich databases. All these issues were shared with the team and considered in the further development of our heuristics.]

16. Formative-Illuminative Evaluation  Playing Formative Role with Illuminative Goals Inform Design Decisions  Change from Energy to Census data Anchoring the Focus on Census would allow: Contribution to Census Testing the Interface with Existing Datasets: Data is rich and accessible There is enough of a user knowledge base to test Findings are Transferable to Energy, Labor, or other Census data.

17. Resource Analysis on Census Data  Census Data Characteristics User (Link)(Link) Variables (Link)(Link) Presentation Forms (Link)(Link) Geographical References (Link)(Link)

18. Users  Why define users? To Create Task Scenario for User and Task Analysis  How? Interview Experts  Regarding characteristics of PUMS: Identify Target Users that Do not require to identify specific small geographic areas Have knowledge, access, and time to program and process the samples Define Purposes and Tasks that involve Cross-Variables Research Study Relationships among variables not shown in existing tabulations Concentrate on the characteristics of specifically defined populations

19. User Types Academic  Disciplines  Functions Non-Academic  General Public NoviceBasic Research  Course Assignments Personal Use  Residence Relocation Power/ Expert Research  Librarians  Researchers [cross-variables in research] Population Ethnicity Education Marriage Employment Residence Housing Etc. Business Use  Marketing Expertise Groups

20. Variables  Information Organization Hierarchical Structure Massive Amount  Terminology Some Variable Definitions Have Changed from Census to Census Terminology is Not Always Obvious. For example, there is no one variable for ethnicity. Asian ethnicity is coded in the detailed race variable, Hispanic ethnicity in the detailed Hispanic origin field, and European ethnicity in the ancestry variable. Different Census Questions Performed in Different Years

21. Presentation Forms  Using Geographic Information Systems (GIS)  Using Dynamic Query Maps Dynamic Queries: http://www.cs.umd.edu/hcil/eosdishttp://www.cs.umd.edu/hcil/eosdis  Applicable to All Types of Data

22. Geographical References  Geographic Boundaries Change Over Time. i.e. Zip codes, definition of blocks  Geographic Areas Are Unique to Census i.e. Tracts, Blocks and Block Groups. PUMS 5%: Only 100,000 people are included.  Geographic Areas Are Identified by Codes.  The Same Common Names May Be Used for Different Geographic Areas. i.e. New York is a state, metropolitan area, and county.

23. Fisheye Interface Research Fisheye Applications  Purposes Searching Innovative Designs Using Fisheye Features for Reference Explore the Use of the Fisheye Features for Usability Analysis Emend Heuristics for Database Interface Using Fisheye Features  Features Seeing Full Context while Focusing on Selected Items Content Visualization (Link)(Link) Dynamic Menu (Link)(Link) Zoom In, Zoom Out (Link)(Link) Searchlight (Link)(Link)

24. Content Visualization  Information Retrieval While Seeing the Full Content PhotoFinder Project: http://www.cs.umd.edu/hcil/ph otolib/ http://www.cs.umd.edu/hcil/ph otolib/ A Hierarchical Focus+Context Method for Image Browsing http://www.viktoria.informatik.gu.se/groups/play/demos/hier archical/ http://www.viktoria.informatik.gu.se/groups/play/demos/hier archical/

25. Dynamic Menu  Demonstration of How the Interface Can Compromise Oversized Categories.  Magnification on Items with Visual Display of Full Content Fisheye Menu: http://www.cs.umd.edu/hcil/fisheyemenu/http://www.cs.umd.edu/hcil/fisheyemenu/ Sony Music 100 Years Soundtrack for A Century http://millennium.sonymusic.com/ http://millennium.sonymusic.com/ Visualization Menu: Jazz http://www.cs.umd.edu/hcil/jazz/ http://www.cs.umd.edu/hcil/jazz/

26. Zoom In, Zoom Out  Being Able to Manipulate the Level of Magnification The SmartMoney Map of the Market http://www.smartmoney.com/marketmap/ http://www.smartmoney.com/marketmap/ The Zoom Browser Applet http://www.viktoria.informatik.gu.se/group s/play/demos/zoombrowser/applet/ http://www.viktoria.informatik.gu.se/group s/play/demos/zoombrowser/applet/

27. Searchlight  Present Definition of the Selected Items  Provide Synonyms  Show Relationships Between Terms Example Race =\= ethnic origin = ancestry =\= place of birth educational attainment =\= highest education allocation PUMA (above 100,000) = state =\= county =\= groups of counties  Show Number of Possible Results Notes on the limitations of data. Make the users aware of the small area data modification due to the confidentiality protection.  Display Cross-References Among Different Databases

28. Census Characteristics and Interface Possibilities  Variables Hierarchical Structure Massive Amount  Terminology Definitions Change Obscure Terminology Census Question Change  Geographical References Boundaries Change Unique Boundaries Codes for Areas Various Meanings for Same Names  Content Visualization Display Information Organization  Dynamic Menu Magnification on Selected Items with Full Content  Zoom In, Zoom Out Manipulate the Level of Magnification  Searchlight Multiple Layers of Display Alternative Terms Definition of Terms Alternative Pathways  Create Dynamic Maps

29. Planning  User and Task Analysis Task Scenarios for Different User Groups  Prototype Testing. Testing with Heuristics Evaluate with Individual Features How effective is it? Are the results transferable to the usability of its totality? Define Minimum Functions in the Stage of Development What are the basic criteria? How complete should the prototype be in order to get meaningful results in functionality?  Usability Testing  Questionnaire

30. Discussion  We would like to invite discussion on experience in conducting formative evaluation, which provides proper feedback to the design team when the design is at its prototype stage.