We present a spatialization of digital library content based on item similarity and an experiment which compares the performance of this spatialization relative to a simple list-based display. Items in the library are elementary school, middle school, and high school science and engineering learning resources. Spatialization and visualization are accomplished through two-dimensional interactive Sammon mapping of pairwise item similarities computed from the joint occurrence of word bigrams. The 65 science teachers participating in the experiment were asked to search the library for curricular items they would consider using as part of one or more teaching assignments. The results indicate that whereas the spatializations adequately capture the salient features of the library’s content and teachers actively use them, item retrieval rates, task-completion time, and perceived utility do not significantly differ from the semantically poorer but easier to comprehend and navigate list-based representations. These results put into question the usefulness of the rapidly increasing supply of information spatializations.
SkupinA.Spatialization. In: KempK (ed.) Encyclopedia of geographic information science. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, 2007, pp. 418–422.
2.
BoyackKWNewmanDDuhonRDet al. Clustering more than two million biomedical publications: comparing the accuracies of nine text-based similarity approaches. PLoS ONE2011; 6: e18029.
3.
SmallHGriffithBC.The structure of scientific literature I: identifying and graphing specialties. Sci Stud1974; 4: 17–40.
4.
SmallHGarfieldE.The geography of science: disciplinary and national mappings. J Inform Sci1985; 11: 147–159.
5.
EverettJEPecotichA.A combined loglinear/MDS model for mapping journals by citation analysis. J Assoc Inform Sci Technol1991; 42: 405–413.
6.
ChalmersM.Using a landscape metaphor to represent a corpus of documents. In: FrankAUCampariI (eds) Spatial information theory: a theoretical basis for GIS (lecture notes in computer science). Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1993, pp. 377–390.
7.
WiseJAThomasJJPennockKet al. Visualizing the non-visual: spatial analysis and interaction with information from text documents. In: Proceedings of the information visualization (INFOVIS ‘95), Atlanta, GA, 30–31 October 1995, pp. 51–58. New York: IEEE.
8.
ChenHSchuffelsCOrwigR.Internet categorization and search: a self-organizing approach. J Vis Commun Image R1995; 7: 88–102.
9.
ChenHHoustonALSewellRet al. Internet browsing and searching: user evaluations of category map and concept space techniques. J Assoc Inform Sci Technol1998; 49: 582–603.
10.
SmallH.Update on science mapping: creating large document spaces. Scientometrics1997; 38: 275–293.
11.
NoyonsECMVan RaanAFJ. Advanced mapping of science and technology. Scientometrics1998; 41: 61–67.
12.
ChenC.Visualizing semantic spaces and author co-citation networks in digital libraries. Inf Process Manag1999; 35: 401–420.
13.
ChenC (ed.) Information visualisation and virtual environments. London: Springer Verlag, 1999.
14.
DevaulHDiekemaAOstwaldJ.Computer-assisted assignment of educational standards using natural language processing. J Assoc Inform Sci Technol2011; 62: 395–405.
15.
DodgeMKitchinR. Atlas of cyberspace. Addison-Wesley, 2001.
16.
GeroimenkoVChenC (eds) Visualizing the semantic web: XML-based internet and information visualization. London: Springer-Verlag, 2006.
17.
WangM.A significant improvement to clever algorithm in hyperlinked environment. In: Proceedings of the 11th international conference on the world wide web (WWW2002), Honolulu, HI, 7–11 May 2002.
18.
BoyackKWWylieBNDavidsonGS.Domain visualization using VxInsight for science and technology management. J Assoc Inform Sci Technol2002; 53: 764–774.
19.
BuzydlovkyJWWhiteHLinX.Term co-occurrence analysis as an interface for digital libraries. In: BörnerKChenC (eds) Visual interfaces to digital libraries. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 2002, pp. 133–143.
20.
SkupinA.A picture from a thousand words. Comput Sci Eng2004; 6: 84–88.
21.
WangCReeseJPZhangHet al. Similarity-based visualization of large image collections. Inform Visual2015; 14: 183–203.
22.
Van HamFVan WijkJ. Interactive visualization of small world graphs. In: Proceedings of the IEEE symposium on information visualization, Austin, TX, 10–12 October 2004, pp. 199–206. New York: IEEE.
23.
PererAShneidermanB.Balancing systematic and flexible exploration of social networks. IEEE T Vis Comput Gr2006; 12: 693–700.
24.
HenryNFeketeJ.MatrixExplorer: a dual-representation system to explore social networks. IEEE T Vis Comput Gr2006; 12: 677–684.
25.
LeydesdorffL.Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design as a journal: the interdisciplinarity of its environment and the citation impact. Environ Plann B2007; 34: 826–838.
26.
BurnsRSkupinA. Visualization of attribute spaces involving places, people and utterances. In: Proceedings of the 24th international cartographic conference, Santiago de Chile, 15–21 November 2009.
27.
ZhuBWattsSChenH.Visualizing social network concepts. Decis Support Syst2010; 49: 151–161.
28.
LiebermanMDTaheriSGuoHet al. Visual exploration across biomedical databases. IEEE/ACM T Comput B2011; 8: 536–550.
29.
DörkMCarpendaleSWilliamsonC.Visualizing explicit and implicit relations of complex information spaces. Inform Visual2012; 11: 5–21.
30.
BörnerK.Making sense of mankind’s scholarly knowledge and expertise: collecting, interlinking, and organizing what we know and different approaches to mapping (network) science. Environ Plann B2007; 34: 808–825.
31.
SkupinABiberstineJBörnerK.Visualizing the topical structure of the medical sciences: a self-organizing map approach. PLoS ONE2013; 8: e58779.
32.
BurnsRSkupinA.Towards qualitative geovisual analytics: a case study involving places, people, and mediated experience. Cartographica2013; 48: 157–176.
LiuXShenHHuY.Supporting multifaceted viewing of word clouds with focus+context display. Inform Visual2015; 14: 168–180.
35.
LimaM.Visual complexity: mapping patterns of information. New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2011.
36.
FabrikantSIMontelloDPMarkDM.The natural landscape metaphor in information visualization: the role of commonsense geomorphology. J Assoc Inform Sci Technol2009; 61: 233–270.
37.
SorrowsMEHirtleSE.The nature of landmarks for real and electronic spaces. In: FreksaCMarkDM (eds) Spatial information theory: cognitive and computational foundations of geographic information science. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 1999, pp. 37–50.
38.
BladesM.Wayfinding theory and research: the need for a new approach. In: MarkDMFrankAU (eds) Cognitive and linguistic aspects of geographic space (NATO ASI Series). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, vol. 63, 1991, pp. 137–165.
39.
MukherjeaSHaraY. Focus+context views of world-wide web nodes. In: Proceedings of the hypertext 97, Southampton, 6–11 April 1997, pp. 187–196. New York: ACM Press.
40.
BaudischPGoodNBellottiVet al. Keeping things in context: a comparative evaluation of focus plus context screens, overviews, and zooming. In: Proceedings of the ACM CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, Minneapolis, MN, 20–25 April 2002, pp. 259–266. New York: ACM.
41.
CockburnAKarlsonABedersonBB.A review of overview+detail, zooming, and focus+context interfaces. ACM Comput Surv2007; 41(2): 1–2.31.
42.
GraciaAGonzálezSRoblesVet al. New insights into the suitability of the third dimension for visualizing multivariate/multidimensional data: a study based on loss of quality quantification. Inform Visual2016; 15: 3–30.
SebrechtsMMCuginiJVVasilakisJet al. Visualization of search results: a comparative evaluation of text, 2D, and 3D interfaces. In: Proceedings of the 22nd annual international ACM SIGIR conference on research and development in information retrieval, Berkeley, CA, 15–19 August 1999, pp. 3–10. New York: ACM.
45.
ToryMKirkpatrickAEAtkinsMSet al. Visualization task performance with 2D, 3D, and combination displays. IEEE T Vis Comput Gr2005; 12: 2–13.
46.
WestermanSJCollinsJCribbinT.Browsing a document collection represented in two- and three-dimensional virtual information space. Int J Hum-Comput St2005; 6: 713–736.
47.
TingSTanTWestGet al. Quantitative assessment of 2D versus 3D visualization modalities. In: Proceedings of the visual communications and image processing, Tainan, Taiwan, 6–9 November 2011, pp. 1–4. New York: IEEE.
48.
JohanssonJForsellCCooperM.On the usability of three-dimensional display in parallel coordinates: evaluating the efficiency of identifying two-dimensional relationships. Inform Visual2014; 13: 29–41.
BorkinMVoAABylinksiZet al. What makes a visualization memorable?IEEE T Vis Comput Gr2013; 19: 2306–2315.
51.
BuzydlovkyJWLinXZhangMet al. A comparison of a hierarchical tree to an associative map interface for the selection of classification terms. In: Proceedings of the ASIST 2013, vol. 50, Montreal, QC, Canada, 1–5 November 2013
MarshallBReitsmaR.World vs. method: educational standard formulation impacts document retrieval. In: Proceedings of the JCDL’11 2011, Ottawa, ON, Canada, 13–17 June 2011. New York: ACM.
54.
Baeza-YatesRRibeiro-NetoB.Modern information retrieval. Addison-Wesley, 1999.
55.
MarshallBReitsmaRSamsonC. Unraveling K-12 standard alignment: report on a new attempt. In: Proceedings of the JCDL’16, Newark, NJ, 19–23 June 2016. New York: ACM.
56.
ReitsmaRMarshallBZarskeM.Aspects of “Relevance” in the alignment of curriculum with educational standards. Inform Process Manag2010; 46: 362–376.
57.
WetzlerPBethardSLearyHet al. Characterizing and predicting the multifaceted nature of quality in educational web resources. ACM Trans Inter Intell Syst2013; 3: 15–25.
58.
DiekemaAROlsenMW.Teacher personal information management (PIM) practices: finding, keeping, and re-finding information. J Assoc Inform Sci Technol2014; 65: 2261–2277.
59.
KellyD.Methods for evaluating interactive information retrieval systems with users. Found Trends Inform Retr2009; 3: 1–224.
60.
SullivanJCyrMMooneyMet al. The TeachEngineering digital library: engineering comes alive for K-12 youth. In: Proceedings of the ASEE annual conference 2005, Portland, OR, 12–15 June 2005. Washington, DC: ASEE.
61.
ZiaL.The NSF National Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics Education Digital Library (NSDL) program. D-Lib Magazine, 2004, vol. 10, number 3.
62.
NeumannAW.Recommender systems for information providers. Heidelberg: Physica Verlag, 2009.
63.
SantosOBoticarioJ (eds) Educational recommender systems and technologies: practices and challenges. Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference, 2012.
64.
TanCWangYLeeC.The use of bigrams to enhance text categorization. Inform Process Manag2002; 38: 529–546.
65.
BekkermanRAllanJ.Using bigrams in text categorization. Technical report IR-408 2003. Amherst, MA: Center of Intelligent Information Retrieval, UMass Amherst.
66.
ManningCDRaghavanPSchützeH.Introduction to information retrieval. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2008.
67.
ReitsmaRHsiehPHRobsonR. Estimation and visualization of digital library content similarities. In: Proceedings of the international conference of information systems 2015, Fort Worth, TX, 13–16 December 2015.
68.
SammonJW.A nonlinear mapping for data structure analysis. IEEE T Comput1969; 18: 401–409.
69.
SunJFyfeCCroweM.Extending Sammon mapping with Bregman divergences. Inform Sciences2011; 187: 72–92.
OkabeABootsBSugiharaKet al. Spatial tesselations: concepts and applications of Voronoi diagrams. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 1999.
72.
BorlundPA.Study of the use of simulated work task situations in interactive information retrieval evaluations. J Doc2016; 72: 394–413.
73.
SumnerTAhmadFBhushanSet al. Linking learning goals and educational resources through interactive concept map visualizations. Int J Digit Libr2005; 5: 18–24.
74.
BorgmanCL.Designing digital libraries for usability. In: Peterson BishopAVan HouseNAButtenfieldBP (eds) Digital library use: social practice in design and evaluation. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2003.
75.
BörnerKChenC (eds) Visual interfaces to digital libraries. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 2002.
