Abstract
In the present study, we explore potential effects of visual saliency on decision quality in context of multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM). We compare two visualization techniques: parallel coordinates (PC) and scatterplot matrices (SPM). We investigate the impact of saliency facilitated by means of either color or size. The saliency and visualization techniques were factors in our analysis, and effects were evaluated in terms of decision quality, attention, time on task, and confidence. Results show that the quality of choice and attention were comparable for all saliency conditions when SPM was used. For PC, we found a positive effect of color saliency both on the quality of choice and on attention. Different forms of saliency led to varying times on task in both PC and SPM; however, those variations were not significant. A comparison of PC and SPM shows, users spent less time on the task, obtained better decision quality, and were more confident with their decision when using PC. To summarize, our findings suggest that saliency can increase attention and decision quality in MCDM for certain visualization techniques and forms of saliency. Another contribution of this work is the novel suggestion of the method to elicit of users’ preferences; its potential benefits are discussed in the end of the paper.Graphic abstract
Highlights
A number of studies (e.g., Jarvenpaa 1990; Glaze et al 1992; Lohse 1997; Speier 2006; Lurie and Mason 2007) have shown that more vividly presented information is likely to be acquired and processed before the less vividly presented information
4.4 Perception and confidence Participants’ ratings show that, on average, participants understand the parallel coordinates technique better than scatterplot matrices, and that they are more confident in their decisions when working with parallel coordinates (Figs. 23, 24, 25, 26). This is consistent with the results concerning the decision quality (Sect. 4.1). 5 Discussion and conclusion Wouldn’t it be appealing to use visual saliency in visualizations for multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) to direct decision-makers’ attention toward criteria of their highest preference, if that would help them to arrive at better decision outcomes? On the other hand, given humans’ limited cognitive capacity, wouldn’t too much of attention on some preferred criteria come with the risk of overlooking, or at least underestimating, the value of remaining criteria for the total utility of the chosen alternative? The overreaching goal of the study presented here was to investigate, if preference controlled saliency in visualizations of multiple attribute datasets has an effect—either positive or negative—on the quality of the decisions made in multiple-attribute decision tasks
We feel confident to state that visual saliency-based enhancement on the most preferred criterion did not lead to any adverse effect, i.e., decision quality did not degrade, no matter if color or size were used as facilitating visual variables and regardless of the chosen visualization technique
Summary
A number of studies (e.g., Jarvenpaa 1990; Glaze et al 1992; Lohse 1997; Speier 2006; Lurie and Mason 2007) have shown that more vividly presented information is likely to be acquired and processed before the less vividly presented information. As far as we know, though, there are no previous studies where the influence of visual saliency has been evaluated for its impact on the performance, i.e., the quality of choice in multicriteria decision-making (MCDM). One of the few exceptions is the study by Dimara et al (2018), where the authors attempt to evaluate three different visualization techniques (scatterplot matrix, parallel coordinates, and tabular visualization) for their ability to support decision-making tasks.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
