Why Change My Design: Explaining Poorly Constructed Visualization Designs with Explorable Explanations
Leo Yu-Ho Lo, Yifan Cao, Leni Yang, Huamin Qu
Abstract
Although visualization tools are widely available and accessible, not everyone knows the best practices and guidelines for creating accurate and honest visual representations of data. Numerous books and articles have been written to expose the misleading potential of poorly constructed charts and teach people how to avoid being deceived by them or making their own mistakes. These readings use various rhetorical devices to explain the concepts to their readers. In our analysis of a collection of books, online materials, and a design workshop, we identified six common explanation methods. To assess the effectiveness of these methods, we conducted two crowdsourced studies (each with N = 125) to evaluate their ability to teach and persuade people to make design changes. In addition to these existing methods, we brought in the idea of Explorable Explanations, which allows readers to experiment with different chart settings and observe how the changes are reflected in the visualization. While we did not find significant differences across explanation methods, the results of our experiments indicate that, following the exposure to the explanations, the participants showed improved proficiency in identifying deceptive charts and were more receptive to proposed alterations of the visualization design. We discovered that participants were willing to accept more than 60% of the proposed adjustments in the persuasiveness assessment. Nevertheless, we found no significant differences among different explanation methods in convincing participants to accept the modifications.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext aece6f4a-8784-4533-bde7-d074caf0328eCited by top-tier papers2
- How Good (Or Bad) Are LLMs at Detecting Misleading Visualizations?Leo Yu-Ho Lo, Huamin QuIEEE VIS 2024 · 24 citations
- Debugging Defective Visualizations: Empirical Insights Informing a Human-AI Co‑Debugging SystemShuyu Shen, Sirong Lu, Leixian Shen, Yuyu LuoCHI 2026 · 2 citations
Builds on7
- Viral Visualizations: How Coronavirus Skeptics Use Orthodox Data Practices to Promote Unorthodox Science OnlineCrystal Lee, Tanya Yang, Gabrielle D. Inchoco, Graham M. Jones et al.CHI 2021 · 140 citations
- Surfacing Visualization MiragesAndrew M. McNutt, Gordon Kindlmann, Michael CorrellCHI 2020 · 103 citations
- CALVI: Critical Thinking Assessment for Literacy in VisualizationsLily W. Ge, Yuan Cui, Matthew KayCHI 2023 · 68 citations
- VizLinter: A Linter and Fixer Framework for Data VisualizationQing Chen, Fuling Sun, Xinyue Xu, Zui Chen et al.IEEE VIS 2021 · 60 citations
- Misleading Beyond Visual Tricks: How People Actually Lie with ChartsMaxim Lisnic, Cole Polychronis, Alexander Lex, Marina KoganCHI 2023 · 54 citations
Related papers
- Annotating Line Charts for Addressing DeceptionArlen Fan, Yuxin Ma, Michelle Mancenido, Ross MaciejewskiCHI 2022 · 44 citations
- Revealing Perceptual Proxies with Adversarial ExamplesBrian D. Ondov, Fumeng Yang, Matthew Kay, Niklas Elmqvist et al.IEEE VIS 2020 · 22 citations
- Visualization Guardrails: Designing Interventions Against Cherry-Picking in Interactive Data ExplorersMaxim Lisnic, Zach Cutler, Marina Kogan, Alexander LexCHI 2025 · 9 citations
- Visual Belief Elicitation Reduces the Incidence of False DiscoveryRatanond Koonchanok, Gauri Yatindra Tawde, Gokul Ragunandhan Narayanasamy, Shalmali Walimbe et al.CHI 2023 · 9 citations
- Designing for Disclosure in Data VisualizationsKrisha Mehta, Gordon Kindlmann, Alex KaleIEEE VIS 2025 · 1 citation
