Visualizing Urban Accessibility: Investigating Multi-Stakeholder Perspectives through a Map-based Design Probe Study

Document Title

Visualizing Urban Accessibility: Investigating Multi-Stakeholder Perspectives through a Map-based Design Probe Study

Document Information

• Subject Area: Urban Accessibility Assessment and Data Visualization
• Keywords: Urban Accessibility, Visualization, Information Construction, Decision Support, Geographic Information Analysis, Accessibility Data Integration, Multi-Stakeholder, Data Trust, Visualization Interaction, Urban Planning

Research Background and Issues

• Problems or Challenges:
  • Urban accessibility assessment involves multiple stakeholders, characterized by a complex decision-making context while serving diverse groups of people with disabilities.
  • Although tools for collecting accessibility-related data have improved, there is still a lack of research on designing visualization tools tailored to the needs of different stakeholders.
  • Systematic studies on the differences in data needs and information construction methods among stakeholders are lacking.
• Significance:
  • Urban accessibility directly impacts the quality of life, economic opportunities, and access to essential services (e.g., healthcare, education) for people with disabilities.
  • Visualization tools for data can promote broad understanding and collaboration, aiding policy-making, urban planning, and public advocacy.
• Research Motivation and Related Work:
  • Building on previous studies (e.g., Project Sidewalk and WheelMap), the authors explore how data visualization tools can better support diverse stakeholders.
  • Two research questions are proposed: What are the key visual analysis tasks and data needs? What are the differences in data visualization construction among different stakeholders?

Solution

• Method or Solution:
  • Using the Project Sidewalk dataset from Washington, DC, the researchers designed 24 map visualization probes across seven map types to support various accessibility-related analytical tasks.
  • Conducted a three-part interview study with 25 participants representing five stakeholder groups, including policymakers, transportation officials, disability advocates, caregivers, and individuals with mobility impairments:
    1. Initial exploration of map visualizations.
    2. Visualization analysis for specific tasks.
    3. Reflection and suggestions for improving visualization tools.
• Innovations:
  • Developed a multi-layered model of tasks and data needs for multiple stakeholders, revealing differences in tasks and data requirements based on personal experiences, professional backgrounds, and decision-making contexts.
  • Proposed 10 design considerations for future interactive geographic visualization tools that cater to multiple stakeholders.
• Implementation Steps and Techniques:
  1. Developed 24 map visualization probes based on design dimensions (e.g., map zoom levels, analysis units, color coding).
  2. Used interview methods to code and analyze stakeholder preferences, data needs, and trust in information.
  3. Derived task models and design recommendations based on stakeholder feedback.

Research Findings

• Specific Results:
  • Developed a multi-layered task model ranging from micro-level (e.g., sidewalk accessibility assessments) to macro-level (e.g., analyzing impacts on access to healthcare and housing resources), covering both personalized and public task needs.
  • Analyzed the applicability and cross-task preferences of various map visualizations (e.g., point density maps, heatmaps, street views, isochrone maps).
  • Identified commonalities and personalized differences in data analysis among stakeholders, primarily driven by personal experiences and backgrounds.
• Comparative Advantages over Existing Solutions:
  • Incorporated input from multiple stakeholders and systematically summarized their differences and needs, surpassing existing studies that focus solely on single user groups.
  • The proposed task model and design recommendations can be directly applied to diverse analytical scenarios, including policy advocacy, resource allocation, and infrastructure planning.
• Experimental or Evaluation Results:
  • Task-specific map type preferences: StreetVis (street view) and Isochrones (isochrone maps) were widely recognized as the most useful.
  • Trust in data was primarily dependent on transparent data source explanations and verification mechanisms.
  • Users unfamiliar with urban geography exhibited analytical challenges due to missing contextual information, highlighting the need for richer contextual data to support comprehensive analysis.
• Limitations and Future Directions:
  • The study is limited to the context of major U.S. cities and may not fully apply to other countries or underdeveloped regions.
  • The impact of participants' familiarity with urban locations on data trust and task performance requires further investigation.
  • The proposed data system does not currently address accessibility design for individuals with visual impairments.
  • Future work will include long-term studies using interactive tools to further explore visualization needs and task spaces.