In this blog, feedback from all four members of the team on four different blogs have been provided.
1. Feedback on Group 3 (SEGA), by Dishani Sen
which 2 things to keep:
This one is from the converge phase: the word cloud that is visualised to see which entities are attacked most frequently is really innovative to me. However, it would suggest making it dynamic, for example, when the cursor is placed on each word, it should be able to display the number of times the word is used exactly.
This one is again from the converge phase: the globe sketch is again very essential, more so because it's pannable. I will really look forward to how it turns out in the final visual!
which 2 things to change:
This one is from the emerge/converge phase: The first sketch which is a combination of time intervals fitted to a clock shape for different years can be in a form of a timeline? Or a calendar with different years, and 3d bars on them to illustrate different types of weapons used.
This one is based on the research question: I indeed also think that the research question is very general and broad. It would certainly try to find a few sub-questions that are more specific and build a strong premise for the project.
2. Feedback on Group 9 ( Visual Reality), by Natalia Bravo
which 2 things to keep:
As I see it, the source of the energy is important. You should keep the analysis by the source even though you’re missing some variables.
The map is a nice idea to me; most people have a rough idea about where the countries with the highest or lowest GDP are located; so, it’s easy for the spectator to associate the data.
You have mentioned interaction in your data visualization. Well, to me the best variable you have to interact it is time. If you can make your map change according to year it could be cool. I have seen some visualizations like that before, I remember a bar at the bottom of a map and when you move it to the right or the left the map changes over time. You can also just select the year.
which 2 things to change:
Honestly, I don’t think you should try to show as much data as you can. The idea of the energy affecting some other variable gets lost in this big wave of information. If you really need to show that much maybe you could try to summarize some things in smaller concepts.
I wouldn’t try to show how the behaviour of the past will affect the future. Again, it is too much information and for a visualization of this kind, I don’t see its need. The only way I see it working is displaying change over years as I mentioned before, then you can add a final year in the future.
Another important piece of advice!
I can see you are using the division of source given by your data, but maybe it could be a good idea for the classical ones of conventional energy, conventional renewable energy and non-conventional renewable energy. You can display more detail after in an interactive design if you want.
Using the data in these groups may be helpful with the missing data problem (because if you have missing data from one source, you can just use the data from another source in the same group)
3. Feedback on Group 15 (Truthseekers4), by Ladan Hosseinimanesh
Overview
TruthSeekers4 aims to illustrate the changes in the population composition of three species of penguins as an indicator of climate change. These changes are supposed to be reflected in the time and geographical contexts. For this purpose, they use a dataset of 200 observation events from the Mapping Application for Penguin Populations and Projected Dynamics (MAPPPD) and a dataset of penguin size measurements from the Palmer Station Research Program.
On the weblog of the group, there is information about the general appearance of the three species and their geographical location and population. Unfortunately, the blog post ends here and there’s no information on the design process and the steps taken to actually visualize this data. To get a better view of the process, I decided to navigate to their Miro board and observe their design sketches. This could give a better idea of how the group is trying to approach the task.
which 2 things to keep:
1. I would definitely keep the physical appearance of the penguins in the visualizations. This will nicely distinguish the three species and is interesting and informative.
2. It is a good idea to include both geographical and time aspects. In the geographical part, showing changes in ice layers together with changes in penguin populations is very illustrative. In the time-series context, the following visualization can be very good and is worth keeping:
which 2 things to change:
1. I would discard the taxonomy depiction of penguins. This is some extra information that is not relevant to the task.
2. In the diverge phase there are various sketches based on the typical bar charts, curves, pie charts, etc. It is much better to replace these with more interesting and more illustrative visualizations; especially, visualizations that are more in line with their mission of raising awareness about climate change. For example, the following sketch is much better:
4. Feedback on Group 21 (Quirky Dust), by Piet Olivier
which 2 things to keep:
1. The clear helicopter view on the design process phases, as presented in the blog post ‘Intelligent Design?’.
2. The thumbnails highlight the stage of the design process.
which 2 things to change:
1. The landing page is sloppy and rather light. This coincides with the fuzzy blog storyline, with titles that point in all directions.
2. Blog posts contain too much text, a poor storyline, risking the reader to drop off early.