Analytic Visualization (AV)
Basics
MSOB
1 Define analytic visualization
2 recognize the purpose of an anlytic visualization
3 identify the type of visual that communicates the analytic message
note: Although the terms visualization and graphic can be used interchangeably, visualization references a full range of products including maps, charts, graphs, and other methods used to present data or convey a message.
What is Analytic Visualization
communicating ideas between people can be difficult, but AVs can help
a representation of info or knowledge in a non-text format
sketches
maps
timelines
charts
tables
imagery
photography
interactives
allows us to present info - showing activity, relationships, or inter-dependencies -- that would be difficult or impractical w/ only text. text and visuals should be complimentary in a presentation
AV Requirements
ICD 203 S9
incorp. visuals to clarify a message and complement or enhance the presentation of data and analysis
spatial or temporal relationships, tables, flow charts, and images should be used when they can convey message better than text
range from plain [resentation of information to interactive complex information
all content is allowed to be visual
visualizations should be clear and pertinent to the product subject matter
should adhere to tradecraft standards
TYPEs of visuals
Graph
chart
timeline
video
map
image
table
used to display numbers trends, value comparisons, changes over time, and propositions
used to articulate hierarchies, networks, and org structures (also venn diagram)
show development over time, as well as relationship between events in time
show events in motion
visually identify places, weapon system ranges, troop locations, infrastructure networks, boarder disputes, or demographics
portray weapons systems, people, diagrams, objects
show indicators, variables, drivers, numbers, implications, and scenarios
Visualization Principles
MSOB
recognize the seven visualization principles defined in DIA analytic tradecraft guide
Seven Principles
- add detail to clarify message
- avoid extraneous matereal
- show comparisons and contrasts
- show causality
- show three or more variables
- fully integrate words, numbers, and images
- ensure the visual conveys credibility, quality, and relevance
a. ⭐ provide a detailed title (and caption) ⭐
b. indicate the data sources
c. ⭐ show complete measurement scales, point out relevant issues ⭐
the combo of title and caption should allow the visualization to "stand alone"
maps that involve distance as a factor will require scales
avoid using photos of political figures
remove elements in charts or maps - such as unidentified lines - that do not contribute to the clients understanding and may cause confusion
make these visuals co-located so the customer can evaluate them together
a. use the smallest effective difference - change shade of blue rather than changing blue to red - to convey relevant changes
b. consider graying our the normal info to enhance relevant data in bright colors
c. use visual techniques like dashed or doted lines, shapes, or iconography to replace color
d. order items by performance, characteristic, time, or quality not alphabetically
evidence can help generate thoughts about cause/effect. its important to carefully examine evidence for deeper understanding
helps provide greater insight regarding the cause, factors, or implications of the topic
replace data on a two-axis graph with more descriptive info (a label or small picture)
try adding layers of detail instead of a legend, which will integrate additional variables and enhance the readers ability to reason about the topic, instead of trying to figure out what the topic is.
these elements should not compete with each other in a visual. in most cases a 1:3 ratio of text to graphic is a good baseline
needs these elements in order to have a positive impact on the reader
gimmicky images and gratuitous designs compromise the cred of the visual and undermine the analytic message
quality visuals adhere to tradecraft standards, including the S3 and confidence level
Case Study - Challenger Booster Rockets
Before the 1986 Challenger launch, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) wanted to know if it was safe to launch in cold weather.
What the data failed to clearly articulate is that there was damage to the O-Rings in every test conducted at less than 63 degrees!
In this particular case, the engineers generated diagrams that were too complex to adequately explain the situation. The ultimate and tragic result was that the Challenger blew up shortly after launch. It was later determined that the O-rings failed due to the extremely cold temperatures.
Evaluating AVs