It is common to advise against using 3D to visualize abstract data such as networks, however Ware and Mitchell's 2008 study showed that path tracing in a network is less error prone in 3D than in 2D. It is unclear, however, if 3D retains its advantage when the 2D presentation of a network is improved using edge-routing, and when simple interaction techniques for exploring the network are available. We address this with two studies of path tracing under new conditions. The first study was preregistered, involved 34 users, and compared 2D and 3D layouts that the user could rotate and move in virtual reality with a handheld controller. Error rates were lower in 3D than in 2D, despite the use of edge-routing in 2D and the use of mouse-driven interactive highlighting of edges. The second study involved 12 users and investigated data physicalization, comparing 3D layouts in virtual reality versus physical 3D printouts of networks augmented with a Microsoft HoloLens headset. No difference was found in error rate, but users performed a variety of actions with their fingers in the physical condition which can inform new interaction techniques.
翻译:通常建议不要使用3D来直观网络等抽象数据,但Ware和Mitchell2008年的研究表明,3D的跟踪路径在网络中不易出错。 然而,如果利用边缘路由改进网络的2D演示方式,当有探索网络的简单互动技术时,3D是否仍然具有优势,这一点很常见。我们通过在新条件下对路径追踪进行两项研究来解决这个问题。第一项研究是预先登记的,涉及34个用户,比较了用户可以使用手持控制器在虚拟现实中旋转和移动的2D和3D布局。尽管在2D中使用边缘路由和鼠标驱动互动突出边缘,但3D错误率低于2D。第二项研究涉及12个用户并调查了数据物理化情况,将虚拟现实中的3D布局与以微软 HoloLens耳目放大的3D打印件进行了比较。在错误率方面没有发现任何区别,但用户在物理条件下用手指进行各种行动,可以告知新的互动技术。