Advertisement

Cognitive Biases in Visual Analytics—A Critical Reflection

  • Margit PohlEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

Cognitive bias research is an interesting and challenging scientific area. Nevertheless, it is not entirely clear to what extent it is applicable to visual analytics. Visual analytics systems support reasoning processes in ill-structured domains with large amounts of data. It is difficult to apply cognitive bias research from laboratory studies based on a minimal amount of information to this area. In this chapter, an alternative approach for bias mitigation is suggested: providing context and activate background knowledge. Advantages and limitations of this approach are discussed.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The research reported in this paper has received funding from the European Union 7th Framework Programme FP7/2007–2013, through the VALCRI project under grant agreement no. FP7-IP-608142, awarded to B. L. William Wong, Middlesex University London, and Partners.

References

  1. 1.
    Adderley R, Badii A, Wu C (2008) The automatic identification and prioritisation of criminal networks from police crime data. In: Ortiz-Arroyo D et al (eds) EuroISI. LNCS 5376, Springer, Heidelberg, pp. 5–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dimara E, Bezerianos A, Dragicevic P (2017) Narratives in Crowdsourced evaluation of visualization: a double-edged sword? In: Proceedings of the ACM conference on human factors in computing systems (CHI), pp 5475–5484 (2017)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Doppler-Haider J, Seidler P, Pohl M, Kodagoda N, Adderley R, Wong BLW (2017) How analysts think: sense-making strategies in the analysis of temporal evolution and criminal network structures and activities. In Proceedings of the human factors and ergonomics society 61st annual meetingGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Evans JStBT (2007) Hypothetical thinking. Dual processes in reasoning and judgement. Psychology Press, Hove and New York, USAGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Eysenck MW, Keane MT (1990) Cognitive Psychology. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hove and London, HillsdaleGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fiedler K, von Sydow M (2015) Heuristics and biases: Beyond Tversky and Kahneman’s (1974) judgment under uncertainty. In: Eysenck MW, Groome D (eds) Cognitive psychology: revisiting the classic studies, Chap. 12. Sage Publications, pp 146–161Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gigerenzer G (2000) Adaptive thinking. Rationality in the real world. Oxford University Press, Oxford, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Johnson-Laird P (2008) How we reason. Oxford University Press, Oxford, EnglandCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kahneman D (2012) Thinking fast and slow. Penguin Books, London, EnglandGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Klein G, Moon B, Hoffman RR (2006) Making sense of sensemaking 1: alternative perspectives. IEEE Intell Syst 21:70–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Klein G, Moon B, Hoffman RR (2006) Making sense of sensemaking 2: a macrocognitive model. IEEE Intell Syst 21:88–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kretz DR, Simpson B. J, Graham CJ (2012) A game-based experimental protocol for identifying and overcoming judgment biases in forensic decision analysis. In: 2012 IEEE conference on technologies for homeland security (HST), pp 439–444Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kretz DR, Granderson CW (2016) A cognitive forensic framework to study and mitigate human observer bias. In: 2016 IEEE symposium on technologies for homeland security (HST), pp 1–5Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Norman G (2014) The bias in researching cognitive bias. Adv Health Sci Educ 2014(19):291–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nussbaumer A, Verbert K, Hillemann E-C, Bedek M, Albert D (2016) A framework for cognitive bias detection and feedback in a visual analytics environment. In: 2016 Proceedings of the European intelligence and security informatics conference, pp 148–151Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sacha D, Senaratne H, Kwon BC, Ellis G, Keim D (2016) The role of uncertainty, awareness, and trust. in visual analytics. IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph 22(1):240–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Woll S (2012) Everyday thinking. memory, reasoning, and judgment in the real world. Psychology Press, New York, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Design and Assessment of TechnologyVienna University of TechnologyViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations