Existing research suggests that individual personality differences are correlated with a user's speed and accuracy in solving problems with different types of complex visualization systems. We extend this research by isolating factors in personality traits as well as in the visualizations that could have contributed to the observed correlation. We focus on a personality trait known as "locus of control” (LOC), which represents a person's tendency to see themselves as controlled by or in control of external events. To isolate variables of the visualization design, we control extraneous factors such as color, interaction, and labeling. We conduct a user study with four visualizations that gradually shift from a list metaphor to a containment metaphor and compare the participants' speed, accuracy, and preference with their locus of control and other personality factors. Our findings demonstrate that there is indeed a correlation between the two: participants with an internal locus of control perform more poorly with visualizations that employ a containment metaphor, while those with an external locus of control perform well with such visualizations. These results provide evidence for the externalization theory of visualization. Finally, we propose applications of these findings to adaptive visual analytics and visualization evaluation.

Researchers collect large amounts of user interaction data with the goal of mapping user's workflows and behaviors to their high‐level motivations, intuitions, and goals. Although the visual analytics community has proposed numerous taxonomies to facilitate this mapping process, no formal methods exist for systematically applying these existing theories to user interaction logs. This paper seeks to bridge the gap between visualization task taxonomies and interaction log data by making the taxonomies more actionable for interaction log analysis. To achieve this, we leverage structural parallels between how people express themselves through interactions and language by reformulating existing theories as regular grammars. We represent interactions as terminals within a regular grammar, similar to the role of individual words in a language, and patterns of interactions or non‐terminals as regular expressions over these terminals to capture common language patterns. To demonstrate our approach, we generate regular grammars for seven existing visualization taxonomies and develop code to apply them to three public interaction log datasets. In analyzing these regular grammars, we find that the taxonomies at the low‐level (i.e., terminals) show mixed results in expressing multiple interaction log datasets, and taxonomies at the high‐level (i.e., regular expressions) have limited expressiveness, due to primarily two challenges: inconsistencies in interaction log dataset granularity and structure, and under‐expressiveness of certain terminals. Based on our findings, we suggest new research directions for the visualization community to augment existing taxonomies, develop new ones, and build better interaction log recording processes to facilitate the data‐driven development of user behavior taxonomies.

Researchers have derived many theoretical models for specifying users’ insights as they interact with a visualization system. These representations are essential for understanding the insight discovery process, such as when inferring user interaction patterns that lead to insight or assessing the rigor of reported insights. However, theoretical models can be difficult to apply to existing tools and user studies, often due to discrepancies in how insight and its constituent parts are defined. This article calls attention to the consistent structures that recur across the visualization literature and describes how they connect multiple theoretical representations of insight. We synthesize a unified formalism for insights using these structures, enabling a wider audience of researchers and developers to adopt the corresponding models. Through a series of theoretical case studies, we use our formalism to compare and contrast existing theories, revealing interesting research challenges in reasoning about a user's domain knowledge and leveraging synergistic approaches in data mining and data management research.