Brian Ondov
Apr 17 · 2 min read

New evidence for the value of animation in visual analysis.

(Note: This post was imported from October 2017.)

Photo credit: Sugianto.

Animation in data visualization has been through it all: from initial hype, to explosion of applications, to skepticism and debunking. If nothing else, the topic of animation is persistent, perennially asserting its presence both in design and in the scientific community. In fact, a landmark study casting doubt on the efficacy of animation recently received a 10-year Test of Time award at IEEE VIS 2018, emphasizing the enduring relevance of this mechanism, even in the face of negative results.

Motion seems to speak to us at a fundamental level, perhaps because it is among the most primitive and fundamental elements of vision. Perception of motion originates in the retina itself, and even motion that is outside our visual field can trigger an innate response to look toward it. But can animation have perceptual value beyond just catching our attention?

As is often the case in science, we stumbled upon an interesting result almost by accident. Our intent was to investigate the usefulness of different layouts to support comparison, with an especially curious eye toward symmetric arrangements, such as population pyramids. For the sake of completeness, we threw in animation as a bit of a wild card. To our surprise, in our first experiment, animation won the day, enabling participants to perform the task better even than with superimposed displays (which were intended as a control!).

So what is going on here? Are these results inconsistent with other experiments? Not necessarily. While it is tempting to use perceptual studies to label visual techniques as “good” or “bad”, the reality is of course more complicated. For example, our setup involved only a small number of moving shapes, and required the ranking of very subtle differences between data points. Both of these factors likely made it easier to track and compare elements of the scene. We think this allowed participants to bring a powerful perceptual ability to bear: the estimation of how fast an object is moving.

What does this mean going forward? Well, for one, our study was highly controlled and narrowly focused, and there is plenty more to be done to explore all the factors that may be at play. More broadly, though, we may benefit simply from adopting a more nuanced view the value of animation for conveying information. One thing that is clear is the continued importance of answering these questions as the field progresses. Whether it’s used to enhance cognition or just for splash, animation probably isn’t going anywhere.

More information about this work:

To learn more, contact Brian Ondov at

For video and demos, visit:

Sparks of Innovation: Stories from the HCIL

Research at the Human-Computer Interaction Laboratory at University of Maryland

Brian Ondov

Written by

Graduate student in Computer Science at University of Maryland, College Park. Research fellow at the National Institutes of Health.

Sparks of Innovation: Stories from the HCIL

Research at the Human-Computer Interaction Laboratory at University of Maryland

Welcome to a place where words matter. On Medium, smart voices and original ideas take center stage - with no ads in sight. Watch
Follow all the topics you care about, and we’ll deliver the best stories for you to your homepage and inbox. Explore
Get unlimited access to the best stories on Medium — and support writers while you’re at it. Just $5/month. Upgrade