Abstract
Affinity diagramming is widely applied to analyze qualitative data such as interview transcripts. It involves multiple analytic processes and is often performed collaboratively. Drawing on interviews with three practitioners and upon our own experience, we show how practitioners combine multiple analytic processes and adopt different artifacts to help them analyze their data. Current tools, however, fail to adequately support mixing analytic processes, devices, and collaboration styles. We present a vision and prototype ADQDA, a cross-device, collaborative affinity diagramming tool for qualitative data analysis, implemented using distributed web technologies. We show how this approach enables analysts to appropriate available pertinent digital devices as they fluidly migrate between analytic phases or adopt different methods and representations, all while preserving consistent analysis artifacts. We validate this approach through a set of application scenarios that explore how it enables new ways of analyzing qualitative data that better align with identified analytic practices.
- Robert Amar, James Eagan, and John Stasko. 2005. Low-level components of analytic activity in information visualization. In IEEE Symposium on Information Visualization, 2005. INFOVIS 2005. IEEE, 111--117.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Christopher Andrews, Alex Endert, and Chris North. 2010. Space to think: large high-resolution displays for sensemaking. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. ACM, 55--64.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Sriram Karthik Badam, Andreas Mathisen, Roman Rädle, Clemens N Klokmose, and Niklas Elmqvist. 2018. Vistrates: A component model for ubiquitous analytics. IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics 25, 1 (2018), 586--596.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Tehmina Basit. 2003. Manual or electronic? The role of coding in qualitative data analysis. Educational research 45, 2 (2003), 143--154.Google Scholar
- Michel Beaudouin-Lafon, Stephane Huot, Mathieu Nancel, Wendy Mackay, Emmanuel Pietriga, Romain Primet, Julie Wagner, Olivier Chapuis, Clement Pillias, James Eagan, et al. 2012. Multisurface interaction in the wild room. Computer 45, 4 (2012), 48--56.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Hugh Beyer and Karen Holtzblatt. 1998. Contextual design: defining customer-centered systems. Vol. 1. Morgan kaufmann.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Anastasia Bezerianos and Ravin Balakrishnan. 2005. View and space management on large displays. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications 25, 4 (2005), 34--43.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Erik Blair. 2015. A reflexive exploration of two qualitative data coding techniques. Journal of Methods and Measurement in the Social Sciences 6, 1 (2015), 14--29.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Susanne Bødker and Clemens Nylandsted Klokmose. 2012. Dynamics in artifact ecologies. In Proceedings of the 7th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Making Sense Through Design. ACM, 448--457.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Nadia Boukhelifa, Marc-Emmanuel Perrin, Samuel Huron, and James Eagan. 2017. How data workers cope with uncertainty: A task characterisation study. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 3645--3656.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Frederik Brudy, Christian Holz, Roman Rädle, Chi-JuiWu, Steven Houben, Clemens Nylandsted Klokmose, and Nicolai Marquardt. 2019. Cross-Device Taxonomy: Survey, Opportunities and Challenges of Interactions Spanning Across Multiple Devices. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 562.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Frederik Brudy, Steven Houben, Nicolai Marquardt, and Yvonne Rogers. 2016. CurationSpace: Cross-Device Content Curation Using Instrumental Interaction. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM International Conference on Interactive Surfaces and Spaces. ACM, 159--168.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Antony Bryant and Kathy Charmaz. 2007. The Sage handbook of grounded theory. Sage.Google Scholar
- Edwin R Burtner, Richard A May, Randall E Scarberry, Ryan R LaMothe, and Alexander Endert. 2013. Affinity+: Semi-structured brainstorming on large displays. In Powerwall international workshop on ultra-high-resolution displays, CHI '13 Extended Abstracts. ACM, 6.Google Scholar
- Susanne Bødker and Clemens Nylandsted Klokmose. 2011. The human--artifact model: An activity theoretical approach to artifact ecologies. Human--Computer Interaction 26, 4 (2011), 315--371.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Sheelagh Carpendale, Søren Knudsen, Alice Thudt, and Uta Hinrichs. 2017. Analyzing qualitative data. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM International Conference on Interactive Surfaces and Spaces. ACM, 477--481.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Senthil Chandrasegaran, Sriram Karthik Badam, Lorraine Kisselburgh, Karthik Ramani, and Niklas Elmqvist. 2017. Integrating visual analytics support for grounded theory practice in qualitative text analysis. In Computer Graphics Forum, Vol. 36. Wiley Online Library, 201--212.Google Scholar
- Kathy Charmaz. 2014. Constructing grounded theory. sage.Google Scholar
- Juliet Corbin and Anselm Strauss. 2014. Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Sage publications.Google Scholar
- Juliet M Corbin and Anselm Strauss. 1990. Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qualitative sociology 13, 1 (1990), 3--21.Google Scholar
- Benjamin F Crabtree and William F Miller. 1992. A template approach to text analysis: developing and using codebooks. (1992).Google Scholar
- Ian Dey. 2003. Qualitative data analysis: A user friendly guide for social scientists. Routledge.Google Scholar
- Paul Dourish and Victoria Bellotti. 1992. Awareness and coordination in shared workspaces. In Proceedings of the 1992 ACM conference on Computer-supported cooperative work. 107--114.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- VF Elliott. 2018. Thinking about the coding process in qualitative data analysis. Qualitative Report 23, 11 (2018).Google Scholar
- Katherine M. Everitt, Scott R. Klemmer, Robert Lee, and James A. Landay. 2003. Two Worlds Apart: Bridging the Gap between Physical and Virtual Media for Distributed Design Collaboration. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '03). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 553--560. https://doi.org/10.1145/642611.642707Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Florian Geyer, Ulrike Pfeil, Jochen Budzinski, Anita Höchtl, and Harald Reiterer. 2011. Affinitytable-a hybrid surface for supporting affinity diagramming. In IFIP Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. Springer, 477--484.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Florian Geyer, Ulrike Pfeil, Anita Höchtl, Jochen Budzinski, and Harald Reiterer. 2011. Designing reality-based interfaces for creative group work. In Proceedings of the 8th ACM conference on Creativity and cognition. ACM, 165--174.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Saul Greenberg and Bill Buxton. 2008. Usability evaluation considered harmful (some of the time). In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems. ACM, 111--120.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Jens Grubert, Matthias Kranz, and Aaron Quigley. 2016. Challenges in mobile multi-device ecosystems. mUX: The Journal of Mobile User Experience 5, 1 (2016), 5.Google Scholar
- Gunnar Harboe. 2017. PapperlappApp: augmenting paper-based affinity diagrams. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Zurich.Google Scholar
- Gunnar Harboe, Gelek Doksam, Lukas Keller, and Elaine M Huang. 2013. Two thousand points of interaction: augmenting paper notes for a distributed user experience. In Distributed User Interfaces: Usability and Collaboration. Springer, 141--149.Google Scholar
- Gunnar Harboe and Elaine M Huang. 2015. Real-world affinity diagramming practices: Bridging the paper-digital gap. In Proceedings of the 33rd annual ACM conference on human factors in computing systems. ACM, 95--104.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Tom Horak, Sriram Karthik Badam, Niklas Elmqvist, and Raimund Dachselt. 2018. When David meets Goliath: Combining smartwatches with a large vertical display for visual data exploration. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 19.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Tero Jokela and Andrés Lucero. 2014. Mixednotes: A digital tool to prepare physical notes for affinity diagramming. In Proceedings of the 18th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Media Business, Management, Content & Services. 3--6.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Tejinder K Judge, Pardha S Pyla, D Scott McCrickard, Steve Harrison, and H Rex Hartson. 2008. Studying group decision making in affinity diagramming. Technical Report. Department of Computer Science, Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University.Google Scholar
- Jiro Kawakita. 1991. The original KJ method. Tokyo: Kawakita Research Institute 5 (1991).Google Scholar
- Nigel King. 1998. Template analysis. (1998).Google Scholar
- Scott Klemmer, Mark Newman, Ryan Farrell, Raecine Meza, and James A Landay. 2000. A Tangible Evolution: System Architecture and Participatory Design Studies of the Designers Outpost. NCSTRL. UCB/CSD-00 1117 (2000).Google Scholar
- Scott R. Klemmer, Mark W. Newman, Ryan Farrell, Mark Bilezikjian, and James A. Landay. 2001. The Designers' Outpost: A Tangible Interface for Collaborative Web Site. In Proceedings of the 14th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST '01). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--10. https://doi.org/10.1145/502348.502350Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Clemens N Klokmose, James R Eagan, Siemen Baader, Wendy Mackay, and Michel Beaudouin-Lafon. 2015. Webstrates: shareable dynamic media. In Proceedings of the 28th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software & Technology. ACM, 280--290.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Ida Larsen-Ledet, Henrik Korsgaard, and Susanne Bødker. 2020. Collaborative Writing Across Multiple Artifact Ecologies. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1--14.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Jiali Liu, Nadia Boukhelifa, and James R Eagan. 2019. Understanding the Role of Alternatives in Data Analysis Practices. IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics 26, 1 (2019), 66--76.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Andrés Lucero. 2015. Using affinity diagrams to evaluate interactive prototypes. In IFIP Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. Springer, 231--248.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Andrés Lucero, Jaakko Keränen, and Hannu Korhonen. 2010. Collaborative use of mobile phones for brainstorming. In Proceedings of the 12th international conference on Human computer interaction with mobile devices and services. 337--340.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Paul Luff, Christian Heath, Moira Norrie, Beat Signer, and Peter Herdman. 2004. Only touching the surface: creating affinities between digital content and paper. In Proceedings of the 2004 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work. 523--532.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Motoki Miura, Taro Sugihara, and Susumu Kunifuji. 2011. GKJ: Group KJ method support system utilizing digital pens. IEICE transactions on information and systems 94, 3 (2011), 456--464.Google Scholar
- Tomer Moscovich, Fanny Chevalier, Nathalie Henry, Emmanuel Pietriga, and Jean-Daniel Fekete. 2009. Topology-aware navigation in large networks. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 2319--2328.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Brad Myers, Scott E. Hudson, and Randy Pausch. 2000. Past, present, and future of user interface software tools. Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 7, 1 (2000), 3--28. https://doi.org/10.1145/344949.344959Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Dan R Olsen Jr. 2007. Evaluating user interface systems research. In Proceedings of the 20th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology. ACM, 251--258.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Thomas Olsson, Else Lagerstam, Tuula Kärkkäinen, and Kaisa Väänänen-Vainio-Mattila. 2013. Expected user experience of mobile augmented reality services: a user study in the context of shopping centres. Personal and ubiquitous computing 17, 2 (2013), 287--304.Google Scholar
- Seonwook Park, Christoph Gebhardt, Roman Rädle, Anna Maria Feit, Hana Vrzakova, Niraj Ramesh Dayama, Hui- Shyong Yeo, Clemens N Klokmose, Aaron Quigley, Antti Oulasvirta, et al. 2018. AdaM: adapting multi-user interfaces for collaborative environments in real-time. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 184.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Peter Pirolli and Stuart Card. 2005. The sensemaking process and leverage points for analyst technology as identified through cognitive task analysis. In Proceedings of international conference on intelligence analysis, Vol. 5. McLean, VA, USA, 2--4.Google Scholar
- Arnaud Prouzeau, Anastasia Bezerianos, and Olivier Chapuis. 2018. Awareness Techniques to Aid Transitions between Personal and SharedWorkspaces in Multi-Display Environments. In Proceedings of the 2018 ACM International Conference on Interactive Surfaces and Spaces. 291--304.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Christian Remy, Gunnar Harboe, Jonas Frich, Michael Mose Biskjaer, and Peter Dalsgaard. 2021. Challenges and Opportunities in the Design of Digital Distributed Affinity Diagramming Tools. In European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics 2021. 1--5.Google Scholar
- Johnny Saldaña. 2015. The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Sage.Google Scholar
- Florian Scharf, Christian Wolters, Michael Herczeg, and Jörg Cassens. 2013. Cross-Device Interaction Definition, Taxonomy and Applications. (2013).Google Scholar
- Raymond Scupin. 1997. The KJ method: A technique for analyzing data derived from Japanese ethnology. Human organization (1997), 233--237.Google Scholar
- Hariharan Subramonyam, Steven M Drucker, and Eytan Adar. 2019. Affinity Lens: Data-Assisted Affinity Diagramming with Augmented Reality. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 398.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Edward Tse, Saul Greenberg, Chia Shen, Clifton Forlines, and Ryo Kodama. 2008. Exploring True Multi-User Multimodal Interaction over a Digital Table. In Proceedings of the 7th ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems (DIS '08). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 109--118. https://doi.org/10.1145/1394445.1394457Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Susan M Winchip. 2001. Affinity and interrelationship digraph: A qualitative approach to identifying organizational issues in a graduate program. College Student Journal 35, 2 (2001), 250--250.Google Scholar
- T Wynn. 1993. Layers of thinking in tool behavior. In (KR Gibson and T. Ingold Eds.) Tools and Cognition in Human Evolution.Google Scholar
Index Terms
ADQDA: A Cross-device Affinity Diagramming Tool for Fluid and Holistic Qualitative Data Analysis
Recommendations
An exploratory study of middle school students' sensemaking in a collaborative game design educational project
ASIST '13: Proceedings of the 76th ASIS&T Annual Meeting: Beyond the Cloud: Rethinking Information BoundariesThe purpose of this study is to understand collaborative sensemaking processes among middle school students in a discovery based hybrid e-learning environment. Our exploratory study reports interview findings on student experiences, and contributes to ...
Using Personal Devices to Facilitate Multi-user Interaction with Large Display Walls
UIST '15 Adjunct: Adjunct Proceedings of the 28th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software & TechnologyLarge display walls and personal devices such as Smartphones have complementary characteristics. While large displays are well-suited to multi-user interaction (potentially with complex data), they are inherently public and generally cannot present an ...
Design considerations for collaborative visual analytics
Special issue on visual analytics science and technologyVisualizations leverage the human visual system to support the process of sensemaking, in which information is collected, organized, and analyzed to generate knowledge and inform action. Although most research to date assumes a single-user focus on ...






Comments