Blog Post #9: Interactive Visualization / Bill Ferster's ASSERT Model

In taking from the book’s own description in his preface of Interactive Visualization: Insight Through Inquiry, “interactive visualization permits the modeling of dynamic expressions of data and information that draw from a number of disciplines to inform the final representation, including design, psychology, perception, computer science, statistics, human interface design, and literature.”[1] In this form of historical interpretation, users are invited to interact with primary sources presented to them in a manner that encourages individual understanding – an aspect I have always found important to implementing public history tools to the larger subset of information visualization. Moving into the introduction of Interactive Visualization, the breadth of what this digital history subset has to offer is dutifully covered – from computer-generated simulations of the Voyager trip to the use of radial networking maps – to help the reader understand where the field was, and where the field is going (contributing to the timelessness of the book’s information.)

It is also here where Ferster introduces many key terms and concepts important for interactive visualization, as well as his ASSERT model:

·       Ask a question

Here, the researcher is tasked with crafting solid questions, off of which the rest of the ASSERT model will fall into place. The authors outline the importance of understanding your audience, their knowledge desires and technological capabilities and having a navigable scope of interest. Ferster also provides several methods (the three-part query and graphical mapping) of generating palatable questions for research – which I find useful not only for digital humanities but just the research process in general.  

·       Search for evidence to support the question

Sources take on a variety of forms, and Ferster breaks down each category of source materials to help better contextualize what an interactive visualization can offer historical interpretation. Just as a thesis topic relies on available source material, so does a prospective visualization. Some evidence will be more effective than others.

·       Structure that information to answer the question

The way in which your chosen data is selected and then structured is integral to formulating a successful interactive visualization. Here, the authors also note useful applications that will help organize and structure data for you, such as Excel and Google Docs. I will say it was comforting to recognize technology I already use on a daily basis being used to create concrete digital projects!

·       Envision ways to answer the question using data

Now that you have your question and the data you are going to use to support it, envisioning ways in which this information can be presented is your next step. Tufte’s 6 Fundamental Principles for Analytical Design provide excellent starting points for envisioning your visualization (such as tracing causality or the original intentions of the documents provided).

·       Represent the data into a compelling visualization

Here we can exercise usability and aesthetic expertise to showcase our questions and data structures. In understanding the various practices of interpretation and perception, digital historians can work to create strong, user-friendly, visually and emotionally captivating projects that support the individuality promoted by interactive visualization. I enjoyed how in-depth this chapter was, even delving into color schemes and the effect certain hues have on the understanding of the subject material.

·       Tell a meaningful story using the evidence to answer the question

Put everything together. This chapter explored the narrative treatment of the data to be visualized, through an understanding of the narrative flow, basing storytelling and representations. Good visualizations house good data sources and research methodology, but also employ meaningful storytelling to answer the lingering “so what?” question.

I particularly enjoyed the chapter on accessibility; while the ASSERT method itself promotes user stability and open interpretation; open access is an entirely different beast to conquer. The authors discuss the implications of the Section 508 Act on historical visualization and the need to implement accessibility for disabled users, as well as provide alternative forms of information dissemination so that all audiences can access that information.[2] This specific need for accessibility is one well-suited for interactive visualization, as the modes of representation are much more variable than those provided by traditional monographs.

---

[1] Ferster, Bill, and Ben Shneiderman. Interactive Visualization: Insight Through Inquiry. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2012, pg. xiii

[2] Ferster, Bill, and Ben Shneiderman. Interactive Visualization: Insight Through Inquiry. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2012, pg. 246.