Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Bar Graph01:07

Bar Graph

23.5K
A bar graph is also called a bar chart and consists of bars that are separated from each other. It either uses horizontal or vertical bars to show comparisons among categories. The bars can be rectangles, or they can be rectangular boxes (used in three-dimensional plots). One axis of the graph represents the specific categories being compared, and the other axis shows a discrete value. In this graph, the length of the bar for each category is proportional to the number or percent of individuals...
23.5K
Pareto Chart00:52

Pareto Chart

8.0K
A Pareto chart is a bar graph or a combination of both line and bar graphs. The bar lengths represent the individual values or the frequency, while the lines represent the cumulative total values. In this chart, the longest bars are arranged on the left and the shortest bars on the right, which makes it easier to read and interpret the data. It can also be called a Pareto diagram or Pareto analysis.
The Pareto chart is named after the Italian economist Vilfredo Pareto, who described the Pareto...
8.0K
Levels of Use of a GIS01:29

Levels of Use of a GIS

427
Geographic Information Systems (GIS) operate across three levels of application, each representing an increasing degree of complexity: data management, analysis, and prediction. These levels reflect the expanding functionality and versatility of GIS technology in handling spatial data for diverse purposes.Data ManagementAt its foundational level, GIS serves as a tool for data management, enabling the input, storage, retrieval, and organization of spatial data. This level is often employed in...
427
Multiple Bar Graph01:07

Multiple Bar Graph

10.4K
As the name suggests, a multiple bar graph is the same as a bar graph but has multiple bars to depict relationships between different data values. One can include as many parameters as possible. However, each parameter must have the same unit of measurement.
Each bar or column in the multiple bar graph represents a data value. These graphs are used primarily in interrelating two or more sets of data. The categories of different kinds of data are listed along the horizontal or x-axis, whereas...
10.4K
Interpreting R Charts01:22

Interpreting R Charts

398
R chart, or range chart, is a fundamental tool in statistical process control used to monitor the variability within a process. It complements the X-bar (x̄) chart by focusing on the range of the data, rather than individual values, providing a clear picture of the process dispersion over time.
An R chart plots the range of subsets of measurements collected from a process. Each point on the chart represents the range—defined as the difference between the maximum and minimum...
398
Histogram01:05

Histogram

18.6K
The histogram is a graphical representation in the x-y form of data distribution in a data set. The horizontal x-axis is labeled with what the data represents (for instance, distance from your home to school). The vertical y-axis is labeled either frequency or relative frequency (or percent frequency or probability).
A histogram graph consists of contiguous (adjoining) boxes. The heights of the bars correspond to frequency values. The graph will have the same shape with respective labels. The...
18.6K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Exploring MLLMs Perception of Network Visualization Principles.

IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics·2026
Same author

Visualization Tasks for Unlabeled Graphs.

IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics·2026
Same author

How Scale Breaks "Normalized Stress" and KL Divergence: Rethinking Quality Metrics.

IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics·2026
Same author

GraphTrials: Visual Proofs of Graph Properties.

IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics·2025
Same author

The Census-Stub Graph Invariant Descriptor.

IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics·2025
Same author

De-Emphasise, Aggregate, and Hide: A Study of Interactive Visual Transformations for Group Structures in Network Visualisations.

IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics·2024
Same journal

MesoSplats: Texture Synthesis with Gaussian Splatting.

IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics·2026
Same journal

GLLA: A Unified Force-Directed Graph Layout Framework Supporting Local Adjustments.

IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics·2026
Same journal

Multi-Perception Crowd: Learning to combine entity and implicit perception for diverse crowd simulation.

IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics·2026
Same journal

Hiding in Plain Sight: Camouflaging Real-world Objects.

IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics·2026
Same journal

RTF2Mesh: Restricted Tangent Face Based Mesh Compression With Neural Displacement Fields.

IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics·2026
Same journal

Practical Occluder Generation for Mobile Games.

IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Mar 9, 2026

Polar Histogram Visualization of Acute Stress Disorder Scale Scores for Comprehensive Clinical Assessment
08:25

Polar Histogram Visualization of Acute Stress Disorder Scale Scores for Comprehensive Clinical Assessment

Published on: December 6, 2024

1.3K

Evaluating Cartogram Effectiveness.

Sabrina Nusrat, Md Jawaherul Alam, Stephen Kobourov

    IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics
    |December 29, 2016
    PubMed
    Summary
    This summary is machine-generated.

    This study evaluates four cartogram types for data visualization effectiveness. Results show performance varies by cartogram type, informing better design for geographic information systems.

    More Related Videos

    Quantification of Orofacial Phenotypes in Xenopus
    09:26

    Quantification of Orofacial Phenotypes in Xenopus

    Published on: November 6, 2014

    10.3K
    Use of Principal Components for Scaling Up Topographic Models to Map Soil Redistribution and Soil Organic Carbon
    09:44

    Use of Principal Components for Scaling Up Topographic Models to Map Soil Redistribution and Soil Organic Carbon

    Published on: October 16, 2018

    10.8K

    Related Experiment Videos

    Last Updated: Mar 9, 2026

    Polar Histogram Visualization of Acute Stress Disorder Scale Scores for Comprehensive Clinical Assessment
    08:25

    Polar Histogram Visualization of Acute Stress Disorder Scale Scores for Comprehensive Clinical Assessment

    Published on: December 6, 2024

    1.3K
    Quantification of Orofacial Phenotypes in Xenopus
    09:26

    Quantification of Orofacial Phenotypes in Xenopus

    Published on: November 6, 2014

    10.3K
    Use of Principal Components for Scaling Up Topographic Models to Map Soil Redistribution and Soil Organic Carbon
    09:44

    Use of Principal Components for Scaling Up Topographic Models to Map Soil Redistribution and Soil Organic Carbon

    Published on: October 16, 2018

    10.8K

    Area of Science:

    • Cartography
    • Information Visualization
    • Human-Computer Interaction

    Background:

    • Cartograms are widely used for visualizing geo-referenced data, with various types existing for over a century.
    • Despite their popularity, empirical studies evaluating the effectiveness of different cartogram types in conveying information are scarce.
    • Understanding cartogram performance is crucial for improving geographic data representation.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To quantitatively and qualitatively evaluate the effectiveness of four major cartogram types: contiguous, non-contiguous, rectangular, and Dorling cartograms.
    • To compare empirical findings with existing metrics-based evaluations.
    • To provide insights for cartogram design and potential improvements in data visualization.

    Main Methods:

    • Quantitative performance analysis, measuring user time and error rates for each cartogram type.
    • Qualitative data collection through attitude studies and analysis of subjective user preferences.
    • Comparison of quantitative and qualitative results against established cartogram evaluation metrics.

    Main Results:

    • Significant differences in quantitative performance (time and error) were observed across the four evaluated cartogram types.
    • Qualitative analysis revealed varying user preferences and attitudes towards different cartogram designs.
    • The study identified discrepancies and consistencies between empirical findings and existing evaluation metrics.

    Conclusions:

    • The effectiveness of cartograms in conveying geographic information varies significantly depending on the specific type used.
    • Both objective performance metrics and subjective user preferences are essential for a comprehensive cartogram evaluation.
    • Findings offer practical implications for cartographers and designers to select and improve cartogram types for specific data visualization tasks.