InfoVis 2004 Contest
Information Visualization Research: A Citation and Co-Citation Perspective
Contest webpage: www.pages.drexel.edu/~cc345/ (personal homepage)
Authors and
Affiliations:
- Chaomei Chen, Drexel University, chaomei.chen@cis.drexel..edu
Tool(s):
CiteSpace v. 1.024. CiteSpace is a Java application developed by Chaomei
Chen at Drexel University since 2003. It is designed as
a tool to analyze how citation and co-citation patterns and trends of a field
of research progress over time. A detailed technical description of the
CiteSpace system can be found in the following PNAS publication:
Chen, C. (2004) Searching for
intellectual turning points: Progressive Knowledge Domain Visualization. Proceedings
of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
(PNAS), 101 (Suppl. 1), 5303-5310.
http://www.pnas.org/cgi/reprint/0307513100v1.pdf
TASK 1: Static
Overview of 10 years of Infovis (Note: 3 overviews of this task are included
for consideration)
- Process 1.1A:
This is an overview of information visualization research from a citation
and co-citation perspective. It is generated by GSA in VRML. Citation bars
are superimposed on a co-citation network pruned by Pathfinder network
scaling. Nodes are articles that have at least 2 citations in the dataset.
Links are salient co-citation associations selected by Pathfinder.
Articles of similar colors tend to be cited in a similar way in the
dataset, which is determined by Principal Component Analysis (PCA).
Articles from the IEEE InfoVis Symposium series itself are highlighted by glowing
colors. Users can use various controls to examine the VRML model (see
video clip).
- Image 1.1A : A
citation landscape of information visualization. The base network is a
co-citation network. Glowing nodes are papers in the IEEE InfoVis
Symposium series. Articles cited more than 15 times are labeled on the top
of their citation bars. The color of a node denotes the specialty
membership of the underlying article.

- Insight 1.1A:
The citation landscape is centered around two articles, namely Robertson
et al.’s conetree paper and the fisheye view paper by Furnas. Both have
the tallest citation bars in the scene. The second tier in terms of
citations includes Tufte’s book, Ahlberge’s dynamic queries paper,
Mackinlay’s two papers, Johnson’s treemap paper, Lamping et al.’s
hyperbolic view paper, and Sarkar’s fisheye paper. The large area of red
papers in the image has no native InfoVis papers (no glowing spheres). The
area contains graph drawing papers published outside the InfoVis
symposium. Several glowing spheres are surrounded by green neighbors,
which belong to the second largest specialty in the field. Overall, the
landscape shows a single structure with no distinct clusters formed as we
might have seen in other fields.
- Caption for exhibit:
A 3-dimensional overview of the information visualization literature.
- Process 1.1B:
This is an overview of information visualization research from a citation
and co-citation perspective. It is generated by CiteSpace, which extracts
title/abstract/keyword terms and the references of each article from the
contest data. To be included in the image, an article must be referenced
more than a threshold value, in this example, two citations per time
slice. All chosen terms are associated with a sudden jump during the
period of 1985-2002. A hybrid network of terms and articles is
constructed. Nodes are either terms or cited references, whereas links are
either article-with-article co-citations or term-to-article citations.
Node labels appear to the right of node symbols. The size of a tree-ring
node symbol is proportional to the occurrence frequency. Rainbow color
mapping is used; we are aware of its problems, but it is good enough for
our present needs. Purple rings are high-betweenness-centrality nodes.
CiteSpace provides various interactive controls over the amount of
information in the display. This image corresponds to citation patterns
across the period of 1985 and 2003. See also short video clips included.
- Image 1.1B :
The history of change in a hybrid bibliographic referencing network.

- Insight 1.1B:
The overview image shows the essence of the field, namely the key themes
and landmark articles and associations among theme. Purple ringed nodes
are graph-theoretically important ones, suggesting potential focal points
in the field. The predominant thematic terms include ‘information
visualization’ (the largest one in red, the word visualization falls
outside the screenshot), ‘data mining,’ ‘graph drawing,’ and ‘parallel
coordinates.’ In addition, the image highlights landmark articles, i.e.
highly cited articles shown as large tree rings. Robertson et al.’s
conetree article and Furnas’es fisheye view article are apparently the
most predominant ones. The network is a pruned version of the original
merged network of individual networks. The pruning is done by Pathfinder
network scaling. In comparison to our experience with other subject domains,
one observation is that the infovis field has a tightly coupled
co-citation network; the entire network cannot be decomposed into natural
and distinct clusters, and it cannot be reduced to a tree structure if
equal-weight links are allowed.
- Caption for exhibit:
A visualization of a hybrid network of articles and terms in the
information visualization research.
- Process 1.1C:
This is a TimeZone view of information visualization research from a
citation and co-citation perspective. It is generated by CiteSpace, which
extracts title/abstract/keyword terms and the references of each article
from the contest data. To be included in the image, an article must be
referenced more than a threshold value, in this example, two citations per
time slice. All chosen terms are associated with a sudden jump during the
period of 1985-2002. A hybrid network of terms and articles is
constructed. Nodes are either terms or cited references, whereas links are
either article-with-article co-citations or term-to-article citations.
Nodes are chronologically placed across in a series of consecutive time
zones (left = earlier, right = recent). Node labels appear to the right of
node symbols. The size of a tree-ring node symbol is proportional to the
occurrence frequency. Rainbow color mapping is used; we are aware of its
problems, but it is good enough for our present needs. Purple rings are
high-betweenness-centrality nodes. CiteSpace provides various interactive
controls over the amount of information in the display. In this image,
articles published before 1990 are lumped together immediately prior to
the 1990 time zone.
- Image 1.1C :
The history of change in terms of the buzz words and phrases in the
bibliographic dataset..

- Insight 1.1C:
The TimeZone overview shows that the field has experienced several surges
of interest since 1990. In 1992, there was a surge of interest in
“information retrieval” and “dynamic queries” as shown in the image (the
time scale is shown at the bottom of the image). In 1994, there was
sufficient interest in “large databases.” In 1996, “data mining,” “3d
information,” and “clustered graphs” were particularly popular topics. In
1998, the topic of “graph drawing” was predominant. The term “information
visualization” itself did not reach the top-ranked terms until 1999. One
can trace each hot topic from this graph to the references associated with
the topical surge. The details of references are suppressed in this
particular screenshot, they will be explained in subsequent figures in
this document. The two large tree-rings on the left tell us they are
groundbreaking articles for infovis.
- Caption for exhibit:
The TimeZone view in CiteSpace showing a number of thematic changes since
1990 in information visualization research.
- Other Images (optional): Lower-level terms are shown in the following image over a longer
period of time (1985-2004, the contest data does contain 2004 references).

- Insight: The
lower-level terms elaborate high-level terms in Image 1.1, for example,
‘search’ and ‘searching’ for ‘information retrieval.’ Additional terms are
also informative, such as ‘multidimensional’ in 1996, ‘networks’ in 1999, and
‘usability’ in 2000.
TASK 2:
Characterize the research areas and their evolution (Note: 2 views presented:
2.1A and 2.1B)
- Process 2.1A:
The growth of the literature is modeled in a 3-dimensional animated
visualization. The evolution is modeled as a state space. An article can
be in the following states: prior to its publication, publication but
prior to its first citation, and first citation. A pair of articles can
have the following co-citation states: before both papers are published,
after both papers published but not cited together, and after both have
cited together for the first time. State transitions are visually coded as
the change of transparency levels in the scene from semi-transparent
spheres and cylinders to opaque ones.
·
Image 2.1A: Replaying the history: views
from the animated visualization of the growth of the literature of information
visualization (derived from the contest dataset).

Watching areas where papers become solid first tells us where
the earliest influence to the field came from. The red area emerged first in this
case. We also know from the overview task that InfoVis symposium papers tend to
be surrounded by green neighbors. The green specialty appears to represent the
central themes of the symposium. Mouse-over each sphere can give the user more
details of the underlying article.
- Process 2.1B:
The key thematic areas are identified by the surge of terms in citing
articles. The evolution of the field is characterized by the appearance
and change of various themes over time. The network is stretched over an
array of time zones so that nodes of a particular year can only move
vertically within their own time zone. Vertical links indicate incidents
of citation and/or co-citation within the same year. Articles that are
cited by the hot terms appear to the left of the terms as if they are
trails of the evolving themes. The terms suggest the nature of evolving
themes. The substance of each theme can be instantiated by the articles
associated with these terms, i.e. connected by direct lines.
- Image 2.1B: The
forefront (thematic terms) and the knowledge base (cited references)
across time zones showing the major milestones of the evolution of the
field in terms of its contemporary interest.

- Insight 2.2:
The earliest theme associated with information visualization was from the
‘user interface’ perspective in 1986. The perspective is linked to a less
frequently occurred term ‘presentation tool’ (not shown in this image).
The 1986 fisheye view paper by Furnas and Tufte’s book were among the
pioneers. The thematic interest of ‘algorithm animation’ surged in 1989.
In 1991, a few papers, notably Robertson et al.’s cone tree paper, were
published and subsequently became highly cited. The dominant themes in 1992
included ‘information retrieval’ and ‘dynamic queries.’ Labels of
‘Johnson’ and ‘Shneiderman’ suggest their treemap papers. ‘Data mining’
was a hot topic in 1996 in association with two papers: one is Robertson’s
1993 conetree paper and the other is Lamping et al.’s hyperbolic view
paper. An easy way to trace the cited references from a term is to use the
free-zone view shown in Image 1.1, for example, ‘graph drawing’ papers
typically point to a Munzner paper and a Carpendale paper (See image 1.1).
TASK 3: The people
in InfoVis
Task 3.1: Where
does a particular author/researcher fit within the research areas defined in
task 2?
- Process:
Only partially addressed. See above images. If authors are connected to
thematic terms, then their area can be inferred. Robertson, G. G. and
Furnas, G. W. are the most prominent authors. It is not immediately
apparent what distinguishes them, but based on the fact that Lamping et
al.’s hyperbolic view paper is between them, one hypothesize is that
Robertson et al.’s conetree is the symbol of non-distorted displays,
whereas Furnas’es fisheye view is the symbol of distorted views.
Task 3.2: What, if
any, are the relationships between two or more or all researchers?
- Process:
Term-to-article citations and article-with-article co-citations.
- Image 3.2: The hypertext cluster, co-cited with the fisheye paper of Furnas
(See Image 1.1, just above the term ‘large databases’ in the image).

There was a ‘pre-historic’ cluster of hypertext papers that
were highly associated with the fisheye view paper. Conklin’s hypertext survey
paper is a branching point leading to several other classic hypertext papers.
This is clearly a hypertext cluster.
OTHER TASKS
(optional)
None.
COMMENTS (optional)
None.