ArticlePDF Available

Abstract and Figures

Advances in personal computing and information technologies have fundamentally transformed how maps are produced and consumed, as many maps today are highly interactive and delivered online or through mobile devices. Accordingly, we need to consider interaction as a fundamental complement to representation in cartography and visualization. UI (user interface) / UX (user experience) describes a set of concepts, guidelines, and workflows for critically thinking about the design and use of an interactive product, map-based or otherwise. This entry introduces core concepts from UI/UX design important to cartography and visualization, focusing on issues related to visual design. First, a fundamental distinction is made between the use of an interface as a tool and the broader experience of an interaction, a distinction that separates UI design and UX design. Norman’s stages of interaction framework then is summarized as a guiding model for understanding the user experience with interactive maps, noting how different UX design solutions can be applied to breakdowns at different stages of the interaction. Finally, three dimensions of UI design are described: the fundamental interaction operators that form the basic building blocks of an interface, interface styles that implement these operator primitives, and recommendations for visual design of an interface.
Content may be subject to copyright.
User Interface and User Experience (UI/UX) Design
Cite as: Roth, R. E. (2017). User Interface and User Experience (UI/UX) Design. The Geographic
Information Science & Technology Body of Knowledge (2nd Quarter 2017 Edition), John P. Wilson
(ed.). doi: 10.22224/gistbok/2017.2.5.
Abstract
Advances in personal computing and information technologies have fundamentally transformed how
maps are produced and consumed, as many maps today are highly interactive and delivered online or
through mobile devices. Accordingly, we need to consider interaction as a fundamental complement to
representation in cartography and visualization. UI (user interface) / UX (user experience) describes a set
of concepts, guidelines, and workflows for critically thinking about the design and use of an interactive
product, map-based or otherwise. This entry introduces core concepts from UI/UX design important to
cartography and visualization, focusing on issues related to visual design. First, a fundamental distinction
is made between the use of an interface as a tool and the broader experience of an interaction, a
distinction that separates UI design and UX design. Norman’s stages of interaction framework then is
summarized as a guiding model for understanding the user experience with interactive maps, noting how
different UX design solutions can be applied to breakdowns at different stages of the interaction. Finally,
three dimensions of UI design are described: the fundamental interaction operators that form the basic
building blocks of an interface, interface styles that implement these operator primitives, and
recommendations for visual design of an interface.
Definitions
affordance: a signal to the user about how to interact with the interface
feedback: a signal to the user about what happened as a result of the interaction
interaction: the two-way question-answer or request-result dialogue between a human user and a
digital object mediated through a computing device
interaction primitive: the fundamental components of interaction that can be combined to form
an interaction strategy
interaction operator: a generic function implemented in an interactive tool that enables the user
to manipulate the display
interface: a tool enabling a user to manipulate a digital object
interface complexity: the total number of unique representations that can be created through the
interface (scope multiplied by freedom)
interface flexibility: ability to complete the same objective with an interface through different
interaction strategies
interface freedom: the precision by which each operator can be executed
interface scope: the baseline number of operators implemented in an interactive tool
interface style/mode: the manner by which user input is submitted to perform the operator
user experience (UX) design: iterative set of decisions leading to a successful outcome with an
interactive tool, as well as a productive and satisfying process while arriving at this outcome
user interface (UI) design: the iterative set of decisions leading to a successful implementation of
an interactive tool
Description
1. Introducing UI/UX
1.1 The User Interface versus the User Experience
Advances in personal computing and information technologies have fundamentally transformed how
maps are produced and consumed, as many maps today are highly interactive and delivered online or
through mobile devices. UI (user interface) / UX (user experience) describes a set of concepts, guidelines,
and workflows for critically thinking about the design and use of an interactive product (Garrett, 2010),
map or otherwise. UI/UX is a growing profession in the geospatial industry and broader technology sector
(Haklay, 2010), with UI/UX designers needed to engage with stakeholders and target users throughout
large software engineering and web design projects (see Additional Resources). This entry reviews the
conceptual principles behind UI/UX, emphasizing visual design following other entries in the
Cartography & Visualization section and complementing the technologically-oriented User Interfaces
entry spanning GIScience in the Programming & Development section.
UI and UX are not the same, separated in their focus on interfaces versus interactions. An interface is a
tool, and for digital mapping this tool enables the user to manipulate maps and their underlying
geographic information. An interaction is broader than the interface, describing the two-way question-
answer or request-result dialogue between a human user and a digital object mediated through a
computing device (Roth, 2012). Therefore, an interaction is both contingentas the response is based on
the request, creating loops of interactivityand empoweringgiving the user agency in the mapping
process with changes contingent on his or her interests and needs (Sundar et al. 2014).
Therefore, humans use interfaces, but they experience interactions, and it is the experience that
determines the success of an interactive product (Norman, 1988). UI design describes the iterative set of
decisions leading to a successful implementation of an interactive tool while UX design describes the
iterative set of decisions leading to a successful outcome with the interactive, as well as a productive and
satisfying process while arriving at this outcome. Accordingly, UI/UX often is reversed as UX/UI to
emphasize the importance of designing the overall experience rather than just the interface.
1.2 Scholarly Influences on UI/UX Design in Cartography and Visualization
Within GIScience, interaction most commonly is treated by the research thrust of geographic visualization
(see Geovisualization). Interactivity supports visual thinking, enabling users to externalize their
reasoning by requesting a wide range of unique map representations (DiBiase, 1990), thus overcoming the
limitations of any single map design. Geovisualization encourages this interactive reasoning for the
purpose of exploration rather than communication (see Cartography & Science), with the goal of
generating new hypotheses and spontaneous insights about unknown geographic phenomena and
processes (MacEachren & Ganter, 1990; MacEachren, 1994). As a result, much of the early research on
interaction in cartography and visualization is specific to scientific discovery, considering expert
specialists as the target user groups.
Today, UI/UX design requires consideration of use cases beyond exploratory geovisualization and users
beyond expert researchers. Interaction allows users to view multiple (sometimes all) locations and map
scales as well as customize the representation to their interests and needs. Interaction also empowers users
in the cartographic design process, improving accessibility to geographic information and dissolving
traditional boundaries between mapmaker and map user (see Cartography & Power). Increasingly,
interaction enables geographic analysis, linking computing to cognition in order to scale the human mind
to the complexity of the mapped phenomenon or process (see Geovisual Analytics). Accordingly,
interaction has been suggested as a fundamental complement to representation in cartography, together
organizing contemporary cartographic scholarship and practice (Roth, 2013a; Figure 1). For discussion of
additional influences on UI/UX design in cartography and visualization, see Geocollaboration, Usability
Engineering, and Web Mapping.
Figure 1. Cartography traditionally has been divided by topics on mapmaking (see the Map Design Fundamentals topics)
versus map use (see Map Use). Advances in digital mapping technology require consideration of a second distinction:
representation versus interaction (separated in the Body of Knowledge under Map Design Techniques versus Interactive
Design Techniques). Research and design now draws from a blending of both dimensions. (adapted with permission from Roth,
2013a)
2. Designing the User Experience
2.1 Stages of Interaction
An interaction requires the user to employ perceptual, motor, and cognitive abilities as they view,
manipulate, and interpret an interactive map. Norman (1988) offers a useful framework for
conceptualizing a map interaction as a two-way dialogue or conversation, decomposing a single
interaction exchange into seven discrete and observable stages:
1. Forming the goal: The goal is what the user is trying to achieve with the interface and therefore
represents the user’s motivation for using the interface (a need, interest, curiosity, etc.). Goals are
described as “high-level” tasks, and may include exploration, analysis, synthesis, and presentation
(see Geovisualization).
2. Forming the intention: The intention is the specific map reading objective that the user completes
in support of the goal. Accordingly, intentions are described as “low-level” tasks. Intentions
include identification of a map feature, comparison of two map features, ranking of a set of map
features, etc. Therefore, an intention yields a specific geographic insight, such as detection of a
difference, change, outlier, anomaly, correlation, trend, cluster, or spike.
3. Specifying an action: The user then must translate their intention to the functions (described
below as operators) implemented in the interface. The interface needs strong affordancesor
signals to the user about how to interact with the interfacefor the user to specify which operator
best supports the intention before executing the action.
4. Executing an action: The user then must execute the specified action using input computing
devices, such as a pointing device (e.g., mouse, touchscreen), keying device (e.g., keyboard,
keypad), or other mode (e.g., gesture or speech recognition). Once the action is executed, the
computing device processes the request and, if successful, returns a new map representation to the
user.
5. Perceiving the system state: Once returned, the user then views the new representation. Here,
strong feedbackor signals to the user about what happened as a result of the interactionis
needed to clarify how the map changed after the request. It is through this provision of feedback
that the map participates in the two-way interaction dialogue.
6. Interpreting the system state: After perceiving the change to the map representation through
feedback, the user then must make sense of the update. One way to describe this stage is
completion of the intention: once a new map is returned, it can be used to carry out the user’s
low-level task and, if successful, generate a new geographic insight.
7. Evaluating the outcome: The evaluation compares the insight with the expected result to
determine if the goal has been achieved. This includes critical evaluation of the insight ("does this
seem right?") and meta-evaluation of the overarching goal ("do I have my answer?"). Following
this evaluation, the user may revise their goal and initialize a new interaction exchange, restarting
the seven stage sequence.
Norman described breakdowns between the user and the map (Stages #1-4) as the gulf of execution, or
the mismatch between user tasks and supported operators, and breakdowns between the map and the user
as the gulf of evaluation, or the mismatch between the result of the operator and the user’s expected
result. Table 1 works through Norman’s seven stages of interaction and lists UX design solutions
available when a breakdown at a given stage is observed (adapted from Roth, 2013a).
Table 1. Norman (1988) reduced an interaction into seven discrete, observable stages. An observed breakdown at a given stage
suggests a specific set of UX solutions. (adapted from Roth, 2013a)
Stage
Ex.1: Analog Door
Ex.2: Digital Map
Observe a Breakdown?
Some UX Solutions?
Forming the
Goal
“I want to get out of
here.”
“I want to explore
long-term patterns in
tornado activity.
The user’s goal is not
supported by the interactive
(Type I error), or the user does
not think that the interactive
supports his or her goal (Type
II error).
Complete a needs assessment to
define user goals.
Implement strategies to improve
user expertise and motivation.
Forming the
Intention
“I will identify the
door I will use to
leave.”
I will start by
determining if the
frequency of
tornadoes has
changed since the
1950s.
The user cannot complete one
or several low-level tasks or
relies on map reading alone to
complete low-level tasks
without interacting.
Develop use case scenarios based
on low-level tasks.
Evaluate the interactive using
benchmark tasks.
Specifying
an Action
“I will use the door
handle to open the
door.”
I will use the
sequencing controls
to advance the
timeline by decade
from the 1950s to
present.
The user does not understand
how the provided interface
functionality supports their
goals and intentions.
Improve visual affordances.
Implement startup and tooltip
help.
Configure the map with a smart
default to show how the UI and
map relate.
Executing
the Action
“I pull the door
handle.”
"I use the mouse to
move the slider
widget from
beginning to end.
The user does not understand
how to submit information to
the interface through the input
devices or incorrectly used the
input devices.
Improve flexibility to support
multiple input devices.
Reduce point mileage and
workload to avoid errors.
Use accelerators to speed
interaction.
Use visual metaphors drawn from
real-world interactions.
Perceiving
the System
State
“I feel that the door
did not open.”
I see that the map
now has more tornado
tracks on it.
The user does not notice how
the map changed due to the
interaction.
Improve visual feedback through
highlighting.
Provide summary information to
compare before and after
interacting.
Use breadcrumbs to remind the
user how they interacted.
Interpreting
the System
State
“I think this means
that I need to push
the handle instead
of pull it.”
I think this means
there are more
tornadoes today than
there were in the
1950s.
The user does not understand
what the change in the map
means.
Combine visualization with
statistical computation to
highlight significant insights (see
Geovisual Analytics).
Evaluating
the Outcome
This is a stupid
door, but at least I
know how to get out
now. Good thing
there wasn't a fire!”
I now will modify
my goal from a broad
exploration of long-
term patterns across
tornado activity to
analysis of specific
causes of the
increase.
The user does not receive
information from the
interaction that helped them
achieve their goal.
Provide visual provenance to
track interactions across
exchanges.
Support enabling operators (e.g.,
save, annotate, export) to collect
insights during interaction.
Support collaboration to share
insights.
2.2 Additional UX Frameworks
A number of disciplines, professions, and knowledge areas contribute to UI/UX design, including
ergonomics, graphic design, human-computer interaction, information visualization, psychology, usability
engineering, and web design. Additional frameworks for understanding UX design have been offered as
UX becomes formalized conceptually and professionally (see Roth, 2013a, for a review). For instance,
Fitts (1954) law providing an early understanding of pointing interactions was based on psychology
studies about human bodily movement, Further, Foley et al.’s (1990; 2014) three design levels (the
conceptual, operational, and implementational levels, as discussed for mapping by Howard &
MacEachren, 1996) were derived from research on human-computer interaction while Garrett’s (2010)
five planes of design (the surface, skeleton, structure, scope, and strategy planes, as discussed for
mapping by Tsou, 2011) are offered from web design experience. Finally, most recommendations
describe UI/UX as a design process that includes multiple, user-centered evaluations, making use of
methods and measures established in Usability Engineering (see Usability Engineering).
3. Designing the User Interface
3.1 Interaction Operators
As with representation design and the visual variables (see Symbolization & the Visual Variables), an
interaction can be deconstructed into its basic building blocks (Figure 2). Interaction primitives describe
the fundamental components of interaction that can be combined to form an interaction strategy (Roth,
2012). Scholars in cartography (e.g., Cartwright et al., 2001) and related fields (e.g., Thomas & Cook,
2005) identify development of a taxonomy of interaction primitives as the most pressing need for the
understanding of interaction, as such a taxonomy articulates the complete solution space for UI/UX
design. Accordingly, there are now a range of taxonomies offered in the UI/UX literature, including
taxonomies specific to cartography and visualization (e.g., Dykes, 1997; MacEachren et al., 1999;
Crampton, 2002; Andrienko et al., 2003; Edsall et al., 2008).
Figure 2. Every interactive map can be deconstructed to its basic interaction primitives. Here, Google Maps is annotated
according to the supported interaction operators, with each click, tap, etc., related to its functional purpose. (image captured and
annotated from http://maps.google.com; February 2017)
Table 2. UI design relies upon interaction operator primitives. UI design recommendations specific to cartography and
visualization are beginning to emerge for each operator. (adapted from Roth, 2013b)
Operator
Definition
Interactive Map Example
Some UI Design Recommendations?
Reexpress
Set or change the displayed map
representation without changing the
information.
Reexpress from a choropleth map
to a proportional symbol map.
Reexpress to a proportional symbol map type on web maps to
overcome issues with normalization and Web Mercator.
Reexpress cartograms as choropleth maps to support
identification tasks.
Reexpress temporal sequences when interested in linear and
cyclical time.
Reexpress between maps and non-map representations to
reveal anomalies present in different visual structures.
Sequence
Generate and advance through an
ordered set of related maps, each
with different information.
Sequence by decade from 1950 to
present.
Constrain the binning unit to intervals in space, time, or
attributes that make sense for the use case scenario.
Sequence all animations (temporal or otherwise) to give users
controls over the playback.
Overlay
Change the feature types included in
the map for additional context.
Overlay bike lanes atop the map.
(Also underlay: Turn on the
imagery basemap beneath the
linework.”)
Overlay only a small subset of context layers for general users
to avoid meaningless overplotting.
Overlay custom layers (via import) for expert users to support
association tasks (e.g., correlations, cause-effect relationships).
Overlay visual benchmarks providing summary context (e.g.,
average, max-min) to support comparison and ranking tasks.
Resymbolize
Set or change the design parameters
of a map without changing the map
type.
Resymbolize the choropleth map
from five classes/colors to an
unclassed color ramp.
Constrain resymbolization for general users to avoid
misleading representations.
Resymbolize all design parameters for expert users to manage
visual hierarchy while interacting.
Resymbolize class breaks to support ranking and delineation
(e.g., clusters, spikes) tasks.
Resymbolize through direct manipulation of the legend.
Dynamically update the legend when resymbolizing.
Zoom
Change the map scale.
Zoom from a city overview into a
local neighborhood.
Increase the level of detail in the map when zooming into the
map (i.e., “semantic” zoom).
Consider conventional tileset zoom level map scales when
generalizing linework for mapping on the web.
Zoom only to a subset of relevant map scales appropriate for
the level of detail of the linework.
Include a widget to zoom out to the smallest/default map
scale.
Support flexibility given the ubiquity of zooming on slippy
web maps (e.g., double-click, mousewheel, pinch-and-zoom,
zoom slider)
Pan
Change the geographic center of the
map.
Pan the map from the origin to the
destination of the route.
Limit the mouse/pointer mileage needed to pan between map
features for the goal of presentation and general users.
Support flexibility given the ubiquity of panning on slippy web
maps (e.g., click-and-drag, direction keys, grab-and-drag)
Reproject
Set or change the map projection
(beyond map scale and centering)
“Reproject to show north as up on
the map.”
Reproject when panning and zooming if not computationally
restrictive.
Rotate away from north-up for egocentric mobile applications
supporting navigation.
Filter
Remove/highlight map features
within a feature type that do not
meet one or a set of user-defined
conditions.
“Filter the map to show top-rated
restaurants only.”
Support filtering over searching for the goal of exploration and
expert users.
Use slider widget to filter by numerical facets and
checkboxes/radio buttons to filter by categorical facets.
Filter to complete complex ranking and delineation tasks.
Require the user to click a “submit” button for complex
filtering taking longer than 100 milliseconds to avoid
perceived lags in interaction.
Search
Add/highlight a map feature of
interest.
“Search for the destination by
address.”
Support searching over filtering for the goal of presentation
and general users.
Search to complete simple identification tasks.
Support spatial search by the user’s location on mobile
devices.
Retrieve
Request details on demand about a
map feature of interest.
“Retrieve details about the State of
Wisconsin.”
Retrieve details to complete simple identification tasks.
Layout the UI controls so that detail retrieval occurs after other
interactions that reduce the candidate map features to a subset
of interest (following Shneiderman’s mantra).
Move from an information window that activates atop the map
to a docked information panel as the f information complexity
about the map features increases.
Arrange
Manipulate the layout of maps,
coordinated views, and map
elements.
“Rearrange the legend atop the map
to interpret the symbol.”
Constrain arrangement for the goal of presentation and general
users to avoid misleading representations.
Separate coordinated views into dialog windows for mobile.
Calculate
Derive new information about a map
feature of interest.
“Calculate the distance to the next
city.”
Use persistent interfaces over nested interfaces when
supporting complex calculations.
Make visual as many components of calculations and models
through the interface.
Interaction primitive taxonomies differ by the stages of interaction they include. While UX design
considers primitives at all stages, UI design primarily focuses upon interaction operator primitives (Stage
#3: Specifying the Action), or the generic functions implemented in the interactive that enable the user to
manipulate the display. Operators include panning, zooming, and detail retrievalfunctions common to
“slippy” web maps using tilesets (see Web Mapping)as well as reexpression to different visual
overviews, overlay of context information, and filtering across multiple facets of the mapped dataset
functions essential to Shneiderman’s (1996) information seeking mantra in big data visualizations (see
Big Data Visualization). Table 2 describes common operator primitives in cartography and visualization,
synthesizing UI/UX recommendations (adapted from Roth, 2013b).
Not all maps need to be interactive, and not all interactive maps require the same UI design. Interface
scope describes the baseline number of operators implemented in an interactive product (e.g., just panning
and zooming versus panning and zooming plus searching, filtering), while interface freedom describes
the precision by which each operator can be executed (e.g., zooming any map scale versus only ~20 pre-
processed scales). Together, scope and freedom determine the interface complexity, or the total number
of unique representations that can be created through the interface. Much like managing information
complexity in cartographic design (see Generalization), managing interface complexity is essential for
good UI/UX design. The appropriate balance of flexibility versus constraint in the UI/UX design
ultimately should be determined through user input and evaluation (see Usability Engineering).
3.2 Interface Styles
An operator is implemented in one of several interface styles, also called modes, or the manner by which
user input is submitted to perform the operator (Shneiderman & Plaisant, 2010 as discussed for mapping
by Howard & MacEachren, 1996). The same operator can be implemented multiple times through
different interface styles, allowing users to complete the same objective with an interface through
different interaction strategies, a design concept described as interface flexibility. In graphic user
interfaces (i.e., GUIs), the interface style is the widget, menu, or form that triggers an event when input is
received; the operator is the business logic that is executed after the event is handled.
Interface styles are defined by their level of directness in submitting input (Figure 3). Fully direct
manipulation enables probing, dragging, and other adjustments to graphic elements of the UI. For
cartography and visualization, direct manipulation can be applied to individual map features (common for
detail retrieval), the entire map (common for panning, zooming, and reprojection), map elements like a
legend (common for filtering and resymbolizing), a linked information graphic or visualization (common
for reexpression of overviews, filtering, and detail retrieval in a coordinated visualization), or simply a
custom widget such as buttons or slider bars (common for filtering, toggling overlays, and sequencing
through a map series or animation) (Roth, 2013a).
Less direct interface styles include menus, or the selection of one or more items from a list (common for
filtering), and forms, or the keying of characters into a blank textbox (common for searching). The move
towards mobile-first or post-WIMP (Windows, Icons, Menus, and Pointers) design in cartography has
substantially changed how direct interface styles are designed in order to support imprecise (finger-based)
touch interactions (see Mobile Mapping & Responsive Design). Command language and natural
language styles are indirect and non-graphic styles for implementing operators. Shneiderman & Plaisant
(2010) provide a comprehensive summary of the relative advantages and disadvantages of interface styles
for UI design.
Figure 3. Every interaction operator can be implementing using one of many interface styles or modes. For example: (a) detail
retrieval through direct manipulation of a map feature, (b) panning through direct manipulation of the entire map, (c) filtering
through direction manipulation of the map legend, (d) coordinated detail retrieval through direct manipulation of a linked
isomorph, (e) sequencing through direct manipulation of a slider interface widget, (f) filtering by indirect menu selection, (g)
annotating metadata through indirect form fill-in, (h) reexpression of a new map through indirect command line, and (i) detail
retrieval through natural language and gesture recognition, Additional details about the depicting interactive maps and
visualizations are included in Roth (2013a). (reproduced from Roth, 2013a, p88)
3.3 Visual Interface Design
As with paper or static cartographic design (see Aesthetics and Design), the visual look and feel of the
UI design is more than just icing on the cake: it sets the tone for the entire user experience, from setting
the mood and evoking an appropriate emotional response through improving usability and subjective
satisfaction. UI design is a highly creative process, and creation of a coherent and unique visual brand
relies on iterative refinement of global design decisions (e.g., interface layout and responsiveness,
application navigation, visual affordances and feedback, color scheme, typefaces) and local design
decisions (e.g., visual metaphors for direct manipulation interface widgets, specific text phrasing for
icons, tooltips, and information windows). Nielsen (1994) provides a useful set of usability heuristics for
guiding visual interface design.
Bibliography
Andrienko, N., Andrienko, G., & Gatalsky, P. (2003). Exploratory spatio-temporal visualization: an
analytical review. Journal of Visual Languages & Computing, 14(6), 503-541.
Cartwright, W., Crampton, J., Gartner, G., Miller, S., Mitchell, K., Siekierska, E., & Wood, J. (2001).
Geospatial information visualization user interface issues. Cartography and Geographic
Information Science, 28(1), 45-60.
Crampton, J. W. (2002). Interactivity types in geographic visualization. Cartography and geographic
information science, 29(2), 85-98.
DiBiase, D. (1990). Visualization in the earth sciences. Earth and Mineral Sciences, 59(2), 13-18.
Dykes, J. A. (1997). Exploring spatial data representation with dynamic graphics. Computers &
Geosciences, 23(4), 345-370.
Edsall, R., Andrienko, G., Andrienko, N., & Buttenfield, B. (2008). Interactive maps for exploring spatial
data. ASPRS Manual of GIS.
Fitts, P. M. (1954). The information capacity of the human motor system in controlling the amplitude of
movement. Journal of Experimental Psychology. 47(6): 381-391.
Garrett, J. J. (2010). The elements of user experience: user-centered design for the web and beyond.
Pearson Education.
Haklay, M. M. (Ed.). (2010). Interacting with geospatial technologies. John Wiley & Sons.
Howard, D., & MacEachren, A. M. (1996). Interface design for geographic visualization: Tools for
representing reliability. Cartography and Geographic Information Systems, 23(2), 59-77.
Hughes, J. F., Van Dam, A., Foley, J. D., & Feiner, S. K. (original edition 1990; latest edition
2014). Computer graphics: principles and practice. Pearson Education.
MacEachren, A. M. (1994). Visualization in modern cartography: setting the agenda. Visualization in
modern cartography, 28(1), 1-12.
MacEachren, A. M., & Kraak, M.-J. (1997). Exploratory cartographic visualization: advancing the
agenda. Computers & Geosciences, 23(4), 335-343.
MacEachren, A. M., Wachowicz, M., Edsall, R., Haug, D., & Masters, R. (1999). Constructing
knowledge from multivariate spatiotemporal data: integrating geographical visualization with
knowledge discovery in database methods. International Journal of Geographical Information
Science, 13(4), 311-334.
Nielsen, J. (1994, April). Usability inspection methods. In Conference companion on Human factors in
computing systems (pp. 413-414). ACM.
Norman, D. A. (2013). The design of everyday things: Revised and expanded edition. Basic books.
Roth, R. E. (2012). Cartographic interaction primitives: Framework and synthesis. The Cartographic
Journal, 49(4), 376-395.
Roth, R. E. (2013a). Interactive maps: What we know and what we need to know. Journal of Spatial
Information Science, 2013(6), 59-115.
Roth, R. E. (2013b). An empirically-derived taxonomy of interaction primitives for interactive
cartography and geovisualization. IEEE transactions on visualization and computer
graphics, 19(12), 2356-2365.
Shneiderman, B. (1996). The eyes have it: A task by data type taxonomy for information visualizations.
In Visual Languages, 1996. Proceedings., IEEE Symposium on (pp. 336-343). IEEE.
Shneiderman, B. (2010). Designing the user interface: strategies for effective human-computer
interaction. Pearson Education India.
Sundar, S. S., S. Bellur, J., Oh, H., Jia, H., & H. S Kim. (2016). Theoretical importance of contingency in
human-computer interaction: effects of message interactivity on user engagement.
Communication Research, 43(5), 595-625
Thomas, J. J., & Cook, K. A. (2005). Illuminating the path: the research and development agenda for
visual analytics. IEEE Computer Society.
Tsou, M.-H. (2011). Revisiting web cartography in the United States: The rise of user-centered
design. Cartography and Geographic Information Science, 38(3), 250-257.
Learning Objectives
Understand: Describe traditional and emerging use cases for interactivity in cartography and
visualization (e.g., exploration, analytics, presentation)
Understand: Describe a user need for the following interaction operators: panning, zooming,
overview reexpression, filtering, detail retrieval, etc.
Apply: Walkthrough the stages of interaction using different interface controls in an interactive
map and identify potential breakdowns and solutions.
Analyze: Deconstruct an interactive map into its basic interaction primitives.
Evaluate: Evaluate an interactive map design by UI/UX design recommendations (e.g.,
affordances/feedback, interface complexity, interface styles, design heuristics).
Create: Design an interactive map suitable for a given set of user needs.
Instructional Questions
Perhaps the two most common kinds of mapping interfaces that geospatial professionals
experience today are simple web maps (e.g., Apple Maps, Google Maps) and fully-featured GIS
(e.g., ArcGIS, QGIS). These UX design contexts could not be more different! Compare and
contrast these two UX contexts according to user needs, potential breakdowns in the user
experience, recommended UI controls, etc., arguing why these two kinds of mapping interfaces
necessarily should be different.
In lab ___, you created an interactive map depicting ___. Use the stages of interaction framework
to walkthrough how you envisioned a first time user to interact with your map (i.e., work through
multiple loops of the framework). Identify potential breakdowns in your design and discuss UX
design solutions to enhance your interactive map in the future.
Navigate to your online campus map:
o If interactive: Critique the campus map according UI/UX design recommendations (e.g.,
which interaction operators should be added to / removed from the map? how could your
university develop a better visual brand through the campus map?). Present your critique
as a series of recommendations for improving the campus map.
o If static: Assess how the campus map should take advantage of interactivity according to
UI/UX design recommendations (e.g., which interaction operators should be added to the
map? how could your university develop a better visual brand through the campus map?).
Present your assessment as a series of recommendations for making the campus map
interactive.
You have been given a description of unmet user needs and target user personas for a proposed
interactive map (derive from class readings/discussion). Develop a requirements document
outlining the functional scope of the proposed interactive map. Include notes about the
recommend interface freedom and flexibility for each interaction operator included in the
requirements document.
You have been given a description of a use case scenario for an interactive map and a
requirements document proposing the functional scope of the interface to support this use case
(derive from class readings/discussion). Sketch a prototype of the interface based on UI/UX
design recommendations, including an example map representation. Annotate the sketch with
notes justifying the interface styles used to implement each operator, the layout of interface
controls, and aspects of the visual design that produce a coherent look and feel.
Additional Resources
(2017) The 100 Best Jobs: Cartographer. U.S. News and World Report. Retrieved from:
http://money.usnews.com/careers/best-jobs/cartographer
Nielsen, J., & D. Norman. (1998-2017). The Nielsen Norman Group: Evidence-based user
experience research, training, and consulting. Retrieved from: https://www.nngroup.com/
Roth, R. E. (2016). Rethinking cartography curriculum to train the contemporary cartographer.
In: 6th International Conference on Cartography and GIS. Retrieved from: https://cartography-
gis.com/docsbca/iccgis2016/ICCGIS2016-16.pdf
Szukalski, B. (2013, August 1). Transforming essential GIS skills. Esri Insider. Retrieved from
https://blogs.esri.com/esri/esri-insider/2013/08/01/transforming-essential-gis-skills/
Tolochko, R.C. (2016). Contemporary professional practices in interactive web map design.
Retrieved from: http://tolomaps.github.io/assets/Tolochko_Thesis.pdf
Underwood, E. (2013, March 8). The New Cartographers. Science Magazine. Retrieved from
http://www.sciencemag.org/careers/2013/03/new-cartographers
Keywords
user experience design, user interface design, interactive maps, interaction primitives, interaction
operators
... ISO 9241-210, menjelaskan bahwa user experience merupakan persepsi seseorang dan respon dari pengguna pada sebuah sistem, dimana sebuah ilmu yang membahas tentang apa yang dirasakan oleh pengguna dalam menggunakan sistem sehingga menimbulkan sebuah kepuasan setelah menggunakan sistem tersebut [3] [13]. Sedangkan menurut [14] user experience biasanya membahas tentang bagaimana pengguna berinteraksi dengan sistem sehingga memberikan feedback apakah sistem tersebut mudah digunakan, sederhana, atau mudah dimengerti, serta seberapa efektif atau efisien interaksi yang terjadi di dalam sistem tersebut. ...
Preprint
Full-text available
Considering that at this time it is industry 4.0 and Sumedang Regency is making a smart city concept, the people of Sumedang Regency are encouraged to develop their businesses in order to compete in the industrial 4.0 world. Therefore, the community is required to make changes to its business system, one of which is changing the business system into a computerized system. However, in current conditions, there are still many people who find it difficult to keep up with technological developments in the business sector due to several problems, one of which is the lack of public knowledge about technology itself. With the existence of a consultation media between the community and information technology consultants, it is possible for the community to solve the problem of moving business systems to become computerized. SAPA TI consultation media is a medium for conducting consultations between the community and information technology consultants where consultations are carried out online. For this reason, in this study the authors designed a user interface and user experience for the SAPA TI media consultation using the Design Thinking Method, and evaluated the user experience using the User Experience Questionnaire (UEQ) as a measuring tool for user experience when using the SAPA TI media. In the results of the User Experience Questionnaire (UEQ) measurement, this system has succeeded in showing that 3 aspects have above average values, namely attractiveness, clarity, and efficiency. While 2 aspects that have good value are accuracy and novelty. Then 1 aspect that is very good value is stimulation. ABSTRAK Mengingat pada saat ini adalah industri 4.0 dan Kabupaten Sumedang sedang membuat konsep smart city, masyarakat Kabupaten Sumedang terdorong untuk mengembangkan usahanya agar bisa bersaing di dunia industri 4.0. Maka dari itu masyarakat dituntut untuk melakukan perubahan pada sistem usahanya, salah satunya mengubah sistem usaha menjadi sistem yang terkomputerisasi. Namun dalam kondisi saat ini masih banyak masyarakat yang sulit untuk mengikuti perkembangan teknologi dalam bidang usaha dikarenakan beberapa permasalahan salah satunya, kurangnya pengetahuan masyarakat tentang teknologi itu sendiri. Dengan adanya sebuah media konsultasi antara masyarakat dengan konsultan teknologi informasi memungkinkan masyarakat dapat menyelesaikan permasalahan perpindahan sistem usaha menjadi terkomputerisasi. Media konsultasi SAPA TI merupakan sebuah media untuk melakukan konsultasi antara masyarakat dengan konsultan teknologi informasi dimana konsultasi yang dilakukan secara online. Untuk itu, dalam penelitian ini penulis melakukan sebuah perancangan user interface dan user experience media konsultasi SAPA TI dengan menggunakan Metode Design Thinking, serta dilakukannya evaluasi user experience menggunakan User Experience Questionnaire (UEQ) sebagai alat ukur user experience saat menggunakan media SAPA TI. Dalam hasil pengukuran User Experience Questionnaire (UEQ) sistem ini telah berhasil menunjukkan bahwa 3 aspek yang bernilai diatas rata-rata yaitu daya tarik, kejelasan, dan efesiensi. Sedangkan 2 aspek yang bernilai bagus yaitu ketepatan dan kebaruan. Lalu 1 aspek yang bernilai sangat baik yaitu stimulasi. Kata Kunci-Design Thinking, SAPA TI, User Experience Questionnaire
... For the development of an intuitive digital product, it is indispensable to understand the concepts of User Experience Design (UX) and User Interface Design (UI). They meet different purposes but contribute together to a workflow based on essential concepts and guidelines to successfully design a digital product [30]. ...
Chapter
The study presented in this paper consists of the development of a platform for digital archiving, collaborative and e-learning, within the framework of the craft industries. This work is part of Anti-Amnesia, a project which aims to investigate Design as an agent for the regeneration and reinvention, narratives and materials, of disappearing Portuguese cultures and manufacturing techniques. In general, this project aims to: develop methodologies, through digital means and tools, that contribute to the preservation of the heritage and cultural heritage of the craft industries; contribute to the sustainability of the craft heritage, through the revitalization of the tradition of these industries, ensuring a continuous transmission of skills, techniques and craft knowledge to future generations; and promote research and research in this area of Portuguese manufacturing. Specifically, in this work to create the platform, we seek, through digital technology, to make information more accessible and universal, facilitating access to knowledge. Through the platform, and with the support of educational tools and services, we will seek to promote the learning of Portuguese manufacturing techniques, in order to attract young people to recover older practices. Based on this strategy, it is intended to value tradition, preserve it, and transmit it to future generations.
Chapter
Consequential and systematic analysis of IT systems usage with the aim to improve end-user experience is one of the most crucial in the era of total life digitalization. In fact, there are different methods for user’s behaviour analysis in the context of his experience assessment; however the corresponding tools mostly are focused on visual representation of user’s activities and system states transitions. User’s journey maps are a common user experience (UX) notation, which, depending on the context, can be used in a variety of ways. In UX tools, it is supported at the user interface (UI) development and testing stages as extended notation in multiple possible shapes, sizes, and formats. eStepControl is a tool, which supports identification and visual representation of IT system users behaviour, integrating UX analysis based on users journeys maps and gives an ability to analyse data about user sessions – to identify the most interesting cases for UX specialist and to make appropriate conclusions. The goal of this paper is to demonstrate functionality of eStepControl on the example of an internet bank, which is a suitable and logical representative of high UX importance in IT systems. This article covers brief description of the approach used for UX analysis, based on machine learning algorithms, statistical analysis methods and graph search and transformations techniques, as well as shows real UX analysis use cases of eStepControl tool for one day usage of the internet bank.KeywordsIS usabilityMachine learningUser experience (UX)eStepControl
Article
Full-text available
Esta pesquisa tem como objetivo a criação de um aplicativo para smartphone que auxilie os indivíduos workaholics a terem uma melhor qualidade de vida. Para tanto, foi empregada a combinação de um método de pesquisa-Design Science Research (DSR)-com um método projetual-Duplo Diamante. Os instrumentos de coleta de dados utilizados no método de pesquisa são a revisão bibliográfica e entrevista, e as ferramentas do método projetual são a entrevista, personas, protótipo e feedback. A motivação deste estudo é relacionada as fortes consequências negativas do workaholism para o indivíduo e pessoas próximas, e ao potencial positivo do design gráfico em encontrar soluções para este tema. Como resultado, tem-se a criação de um protótipo de alta fidelidade, com o uso adequado do UX/UI, que serve de base teórica e prática para futuros pesquisadores e que auxilie os workaholics a viverem melhor. This research aims to create a smartphone application that helps workaholic individuals to have a better quality of life. Therefore, a combination of a research method-Design Science Research (DSR)-with a design method-Double Diamond was used. The data collection instruments used in the research method are a literature review and interview, and the design method tools are an interview, personas, prototype and feedback. The motivation of this study is related to the strong negative consequences of workaholism for the individual and people close to him, and the positive potential of graphic design in finding solutions to this theme. As a result, a high-fidelity prototype was created, with the proper use of UX/UI, which serves as a theoretical and practical basis for future researchers and that helps workaholics to live better.
Thesis
Full-text available
O presente trabalho tem como objetivo apresentar uma proposta de interface digital que permita avaliar a proficiência, no Português Europeu (PE), de crianças lusodescendentes na diáspora, e que forneça material informativo sobre a aquisição precoce de línguas de herança. No desenvolvimento deste trabalho foram expostos e discutidos os obstáculos à aquisição de uma língua de herança, ligados aos sistemas educativos, contextos socioculturais, e fatores extralinguísticos. Discutiu-se a fiabilidade da utilização dos quadros de nível de língua já existentes, aplicados ao ensino de línguas de herança. A interface pretende disponibilizar um Cloze Test como ferramenta de avaliação fiável de competências linguísticas, uma vez que se revela a falta de ferramentas adaptadas à avaliação de proficiência e, também, ao contexto de aquisição e necessidades de aprendizagem dos falantes de herança. O Cloze Test é um teste de preenchimento de lacunas de um texto que agrega a avaliação de conhecimentos lexicais, morfossintáticos e discursivos, correspondentes a diferentes níveis de dificuldade. O teste permite distribuir os falantes em grupos diferentes de proficiência e detetar em que estruturas da língua apresentam mais dificuldades. Relativamente ao método de avaliação, foi concebido um modelo de pontuação e distribuição de níveis de proficiência, acompanhado das respetivas descrições de nível, que deriva do grau de dificuldade de estruturas linguísticas. A interface é apresentada em formato de protótipo interativo que resultou da criação de Personas (utilizadores-alvo), da análise das suas necessidades e objetivos, e a incorporação de conceitos relevantes da componente do design de interfaces web. Por fim, realizou-se a testagem da usabilidade do protótipo, através de entrevistas, na qual se destacou a importância do planeamento do design de interação e navegação e do posicionamento e clareza do conteúdo informativo. Com as entrevistas, o problema do sistema de ensino do português como língua de herança voltou a surgir, ressaltando a disparidade dos formatos de ensino entre países. Concluiu-se que a interface está em conformidade com as necessidades dos utilizadores-alvo e que possui várias possibilidades de expansão. Prevê-se que o futuro lançamento desta interface permita contribuir para esta área de investigação da linguística. Esta interface digital tem como público-alvo professores, educadores, pais e demais agentes educativos.
Article
Insufficient user involvement, lack of user feedback, incomplete and changing user requirements are some of the critical reasons for the difficulty of IS usage, which could potentially reduce the number of customers. Under the previous authors’ research, the method for analysing the behaviour of IT system users was developed, which was intended to improve the usability of the system and thus could increase the efficiency of business processes. The developed method is based on the use of graph searching algo rithms, Markov chains and Machine Learning approach. This paper focuses on detailing of method output data in the context of definition of their importance based on expert evaluation and demonstration of visual presentation of different UX analysis situations. The paper briefly reminds the essence of the method, including both the input and output data sets, and, with the help of experts, evaluates the expected result in the context of their importance in UX analysis. It also introduces visualization prototype developed to obtain the output data, which allows verifying the input/output data transformation possibilities and expected data acquisition potential.
Article
Full-text available
Nowadays, it is essential to use all concepts of Human-Computer Interaction to understand mobile application design usability. This manuscript aims to analyze a mobile application user experience (Grab online transportation), especially Grab foodservice users, using a user experience questionnaire. We noticed some Grab food users' complaints, such as complaints related to the location, price, and payment. The data was then analyzed using an excel data analysis tool. The findings showed that all six scales of the User Experience Questionnaire (UEQ) were good except the dependability scale. The outcome indicated that the value of attractiveness was 1.64, perspicuity 1.69, dependability 1.29, efficiency 1.60, stimulation 1.57, and novelty 1.21. In addition, the mean scale value computed was favorable, and all values were more significant than 0.8 compared to the UEQ benchmark. The findings can be used for dependability improvement to reduce complaints from users.
Article
Full-text available
Mobile map applications are typically used by a broad range of users. Users can be diverse in their context attributes (e.g. map use experience, activities during map use), and several previous user experience (UX) studies have focused on understanding how some contextual factors influence the UX for designing maps that satisfy users’ needs. A need for research remains to evaluate the relationship between user context, UX, and variants of mobile map element design. In this article, we present our research investigating the interplay of these factors through an empirical user study with citizens in Austria. We created an online survey and generated 84 map variations, combining seven map-related tasks, three base map styles, two map detail densities, and two time-pressure variants. We tested these map variations with 107 survey participants and related their UX to user context. Map-related tasks emerged as a dominant factor modifying the map design UX. Further results showed that interactivity loaded map-related tasks were aided when paired with low detail-dense base maps, contrasting overlay features. We recommend future research to analyze an extended set of context attributes with additional participant data, to evaluate dynamic variations in context, and to find ways to dynamically monitor mobile map design UX.
Conference Paper
Full-text available
In this paper, I discuss my experience over the past five years restructuring the cartography curriculum at the University of Wisconsin–Madison to account for sweeping shifts in conceptual framings, mapping technologies, and professional expectations. To guide the refresh, I aligned the cartography curriculum to an orthogonal pair of axes: the traditional distinction in cartography between mapmaking and map use, and an emerging distinction between representation and interaction. A single course was designed to cover each of the four pairwise antipodes of the orthogonal axes, with a fifth course positioned at the intersection of these axes to integrate influences and technologies. In the paper, I discuss the pedagogical philosophy guiding the revised curriculum, the organization of design concepts and technical skills taught in each course, and lessons learned from my experience for keeping curriculum malleable as cartography continues to evolve.
Article
Full-text available
The following tutorial describes how to make an interactive choropleth map using the D3 (Data-Driven Documents) web mapping library (d3js.org). This tutorial is based on a laboratory assignment created in the fall of 2014 for an advanced class titled Interactive Cartography and Geovisualization at the University of Wisconsin–Madison. This is the second of two On the Horizon tutorials on web mapping and extends a previous tutorial that used the Leaflet JavaScript library (see Donohue et al. 2013; dx.doi.org/10.14714/CP76.1248). Fully commented source code for both tutorials is available on GitHub (github.com/uwcart/cartographic-perspectives). All code is distributed under a Creative Commons 3.0 license and available for unconditional use, with the exception of the files in the lib directory, for which certain license conditions are required as described in the file LICENSE.txt.
Article
This chapter focuses on approaches to facilitate user-centered design (UCD) between distributed users and developers of collaborative tools. Additionally, it introduces a case study that illustrates the way these approaches have been implemented to aid remote collaboration in the environmental sciences. It introduces an initial set of online user centered assessment techniques that can be expanded into a more formal methodology, which merges electronic usability assessment with traditional techniques. Most current UCD assessment methods are derived from recommendations made for single user workspaces. Although these methods provide a basis for creating new collaborative geovisualization tools, they do not fully support collaboration between groups of usability test subjects and software designers who are often distributed in space and usability measurements of geocollaborative tools running in a "real-world" distributed mode. Research on collaborative geovisualization tool design has just begun and offers many interesting research challenges.
Article
This book provides an introduction to HCI and usability aspects of Geographical Information Systems and Science. Its aim is to introduce the principles of Human-Computer Interaction (HCI); to discuss the special usability aspects of GIS which designers and developers need to take into account when developing such systems; and to offer a set of tried and tested frameworks, matrices and techniques that can be used within GIS projects. Geographical Information Systems and other applications of computerised mapping have gained popularity in recent years. Today, computer-based maps are common on the World Wide Web, mobile phones, satellite navigation systems and in various desktop computing packages. The more sophisticated packages that allow the manipulation and analysis of geographical information are used in location decisions of new businesses, for public service delivery for planning decisions by local and central government. Many more applications exist and some estimate the number of people across the world that are using GIS in their daily work at several millions. However, many applications of GIS are hard to learn and to master. This is understandable, as until quite recently, the main focus of software vendors in the area of GIS was on the delivery of basic functionality and development of methods to present and manipulate geographical information using the available computing resources. As a result, little attention was paid to usability aspects of GIS. This is evident in many public and private systems where the terminology, conceptual design and structure are all centred around the engineering of GIS and not on the needs and concepts that are familiar to the user. This book covers a range of topics from the cognitive models of geographical representation, to interface design. It will provide the reader with frameworks and techniques that can be used and description of case studies in which these techniques have been used for computer mapping application.