Article published In: Information Visualization
Edited by Marian Dörk and Isabel Meirelles
[Information Design Journal 25:1] 2019
► pp. 71–86
Feeling numbers
The emotional impact of proximity techniques in visualization
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) 4.0 license.
For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at rights@benjamins.nl.
Published online: 16 March 2020
https://doi.org/10.1075/idj.25.1.06cam
https://doi.org/10.1075/idj.25.1.06cam
Abstract
For means of communication, persuasion is a natural and critical part of conveying a message. Data visualizations, being
means of communication themselves, are used as rhetorical instruments, but how they persuade has yet to be fully understood. Based on George
Campbell’s rhetorical theory, this paper presents the results of an empirical study testing the effectiveness of appeals to emotion through
proximity techniques – the contextual framing of a visualization. The findings indicate that people feel greater interest towards a topic
when the visualized data are more relevant to them, and that data representing events closer in time are more affecting.
Keywords: data visualization, rhetoric, pathos, emotion
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Background
- 2.1Rhetoric in design and visualization
- 2.1.1Data storytelling
- 2.1.2Persuasive cartography
- 2.2Visualization and rhetoric: Points of discomfort
- 2.2.1Bias and deception
- 2.2.2Visual embellishments
- 2.1Rhetoric in design and visualization
- 3.The study
- 3.1Case study selection
- 3.2Methods
- 3.2.1Measurements
- 3.2.2Chart design
- 3.2.3Treatments
- 3.3Procedure
- 4.Results
- 4.1Demographics and involvement
- 4.2Attitudes and changes
- 4.3Emotion
- 5.Discussion
- 6.Conclusion
References
References (50)
Bateman, S., Mandryk, R. L., Gutwin, C., Genest, A., McDine, D., & Brooks, C. (2010). Useful junk?: The effects of visual embellishment on comprehension and memorability of charts. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 2573–2582). New York, NY, USA: ACM.
Bateson, G. (1972). Steps to an ecology of mind: Collected essays in anthropology, psychiatry, evolution, and epistemology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Borgo, R., Abdul-Rahman, A., Mohamed, F., Grant, P. W., Reppa, I., Floridi, L., & Chen, M. (2012). An empirical study on using visual embellishments in visualization. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 18(12), 2759–2768.
Borkin, M. A., Bylinskii, Z., Kim, N. W., Bainbridge, C. M., Yeh, C. S., Borkin, D., … Oliva, A. (2016). Beyond memorability: Visualization recognition and recall. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 22(1), 519–528.
Borkin, M. A., Vo, A. A., Bylinskii, Z., Isola, P., Sunkavalli, S., Oliva, A., & Pfister, H. (2013). What makes a visualization memorable? IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 19(12), 2306–2315.
Boy, J., Pandey, A. V., Emerson, J., Satterthwaite, M., Nov, O., & Bertini, E. (2017). Showing people behind data: Does anthropomorphizing visualizations elicit more empathy for human rights data? In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 5462–5474). New York, NY, USA: ACM.
Buchanan, R. (1985). Declaration by design: Rhetoric, argument, and demonstration in design practice. Design Issues, 2(1), 4–22.
Campbell, G. (1776). The philosophy of rhetoric. (vol. 11). London: W. Strahan. Retrieved from [URL]
Dörk, M., Feng, P., Collins, C., & Carpendale, S. (2013). Critical InfoVis: Exploring the politics of visualization. In CHI ’13 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 2189–2198). New York, NY, USA: ACM.
Epstein, S. (1994). Integration of the cognitive and the psychodynamic unconscious. American Psychologist, 49(8), 709–724.
Funk, C., & Goo, S. K. (2015). A look at what the public knows and does not know about science (p. 40). Pew Research Center.
Haushofer, K. (1928). Die suggestive Karte. In K. Haushofer, E. Obst, H. Lautensach, & O. Maull (Eds.), Bausteine zur Geopolitik (pp. 343–348). Leipzig: Kurt Vowinckel Verlag.
Haroz, S., Kosara, R., & Franconeri, S. L. (2015). ISOTYPE visualization: Working memory, performance, and engagement with pictographs. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1191–1200). New York, NY, USA: ACM.
Hoeken, H. (2001). Anecdotal, statistical, and causal evidence: Their perceived and actual persuasiveness. Argumentation, 15(4), 425–437.
Holmes, N. (1984). Designer’s guide to creating charts and diagrams (2nd ed.). New York: Watson-Guptill.
Hullman, J., & Diakopoulos, N. (2011). Visualization rhetoric: framing effects in narrative visualization. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 17(12), 2231–2240.
Johnson, B. T., & Eagly, A. H. (1989). Effects of involvement on persuasion: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 106(2), 290–314.
Kogut, T., & Ritov, I. (2005). The singularity effect of identified victims in separate and joint evaluations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 97(2), 106–116.
Kostelnick, C. (2016). The re-emergence of emotional appeals in interactive data visualization. Technical Communication, 63(2), 116–135.
Lee, S., Kim, S.-H., & Kwon, B. C. (2017). VLAT: Development of a visualization literacy assessment test. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 23(1), 551–560.
Lee, S., Winterich, K. P., & Ross Jr., W. T. (2014). I’m moral, but I won’t help you: The distinct roles of empathy and justice in donations. Journal of Consumer Research, 41(3), 678–696.
Lumley, T., Diehr, P., Emerson, S., & Chen, L. (2002). The importance of the normality assumption in large public health data sets. Annual Review of Public Health, 23(1), 151–169.
Muehlenhaus, I. (2010). Lost in visualization: Using quantitative content analysis to identify, measure, and categorize political cartographic manipulations (Ph.D.). University of Minnesota, United States, Minnesota. Retrieved from [URL]
(2012). If looks could kill: The impact of different rhetorical styles on persuasive geocommunication. The Cartographic Journal, 491, 361–375.
(2013). The design and composition of persuasive maps. Cartography and Geographic Information Science, 40(5), 401–414.
Pandey, A., Manivannan, A., Nov, O., Satterthwaite, M. L., & Bertini, E. (2014). The persuasive power of data visualization. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 20(12), 2211–2220.
Pandey, A., Rall, K., Satterthwaite, M. L., Nov, O., & Bertini, E. (2015). How deceptive are deceptive visualizations? An empirical analysis of common distortion techniques. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1469–1478). New York, NY, USA: ACM.
Riche, N. H., Hurter, C., Diakopoulos, N., & Carpendale, S. (Eds.). (2018). Data-driven atorytelling. Boca Raton, Florida: A K Peters/CRC Press.
Scherer, K. R. (2001). Emotions, psychological structure of. In N. J. Smelser & P. B. Baltes (Eds.), International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (pp. 4472–4477). Oxford: Pergamon.
(2005). What are emotions? And how can they be measured? Social Science Information, 44(4), 695–729.
Segel, E., & Heer, J. (2010). Narrative visualization: Telling stories with data. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 16(6), 1139–1148.
Shelter Animals Count. The National Database Project (2017). Retrieved from [URL]
Slovic, P. (2007). “If I look at the mass I will never act”: Psychic numbing and genocide. Judgment and Decision Making, 2(2), 79–95.
Small, D. A., Loewenstein, G., & Slovic, P. (2007). Sympathy and callousness: The impact of deliberative thought on donations to identifiable and statistical victims. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 102(2), 143–153.
Tactical Technology Collective (2014). Visualising Information for Advocacy (2nd ed.). Retrieved from [URL]
Thudt, A., Perin, C., Willett, W., & Carpendale, S. (2017). Subjectivity in Personal storytelling with visualization. Information Design Journal, 23(1): 48–64.
Vande Moere, A., Tomitsch, M., Wimmer, C., Christoph, B., & Grechenig, T. (2012). evaluating the effect of style in information visualization. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 18(12), 2739–2748.
Västfjäll, D., Slovic, P., Mayorga, M., & Peters, E. (2014). Compassion fade: Affect and charity are greatest for a single child in need. PLoS ONE, 9(6).
Viegas, F. B., & Wattenberg, M. (2007). Artistic data visualization: Beyond visual analytics. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, (4564), 182–191.
Cited by (12)
Cited by 12 other publications
Koesten, Laura, Antonia Saske, Sandra Maria Starchenko & Kathleen Gregory
Puerta, Eduardo, Shani Claire Spivak & Michael Correll
Garretón, Manuela, Francesca Morini, Pablo Celhay, Marian Dörk & Denis Parra
Zhang, Angie, Rocita Rana, Alexander Boltz, Veena Dubal & Min Kyung Lee
Alieva, Iuliia
Verma, Arnav, Luiz Morais, Pierre Dragicevic & Fanny Chevalier
Lee-Robbins, Elsie & Eytan Adar
Sundar, S. Shyam, Haiyan Jia, Saraswathi Bellur, Jeeyun Oh & Hyang-Sook Kim
Boot, Arnout B., Katinka Dijkstra & Rolf A. Zwaan
Ehmel, F., V. Brüggemann & M. Dörk
Morais, Luiz, Yvonne Jansen, Nazareno Andrade & Pierre Dragicevic
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 11 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
