Hidy Kong | Searcharxiv

arXiv2026

A Comparative Study of Static, Scrollytelling, and Chatbot Visualization Onboarding Techniques for UX Designers

User experience (UX) designers face barriers when creating data visualizations due to limited domain expertise in visualization or unfamiliarity with specialized tools. This highlights a clear need for effective methods to build visualization literacy. To address this, we evaluated three visualization onboarding techniques -- static, scrollytelling, and chatbot -- in an experimental study with 25 UX designers and students. We measured visualization comprehension and guideline adherence during a visualization creation task, followed by surveys and interviews to capture preferences and experiences. Compared to static onboarding, the pooled interactive condition (scrollytelling or chatbot) was associated with significantly higher guideline-adherence scores during visualization creation; both interactive techniques also received higher engagement ratings. Instruction clarity ratings were significantly higher when the two interactive conditions were pooled. Comprehension did not differ significantly across conditions. While participants generally preferred the interactive techniques, no significant differences emerged between scrollytelling and chatbot in performance or onboarding experience ratings. Drawing on the findings, we discuss three design dimensions of visualization onboarding (narrative structure, visual content layout, and navigational flexibility), their design implications, and potential opportunities for future research in this field.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2026

Not a Collaborator or a Supervisor, but an Assistant: Striking the Balance Between Efficiency and Ownership in AI-incorporated Qualitative Data Analysis

Qualitative research offers deep insights into human experiences, but its processes, such as coding and thematic analysis, are time-intensive and laborious. Recent advancements in qualitative data analysis (QDA) tools have introduced AI capabilities, allowing researchers to handle large datasets and automate labor-intensive tasks. However, qualitative researchers have expressed concerns about AI's lack of contextual understanding and its potential to overshadow the collaborative and interpretive nature of their work. This study investigates researchers' preferences among three degrees of delegation of AI in QDA (human-only, human-initiated, and AI-initiated coding) and explores factors influencing these preferences. Through interviews with 16 qualitative researchers, we identified efficiency, ownership, and trust as essential factors in determining the desired degree of delegation. Our findings highlight researchers' openness to AI as a supportive tool while emphasizing the importance of human oversight and transparency in automation. Based on the results, we discuss three factors of trust in AI for QDA and potential ways to strengthen collaborative efforts in QDA and decrease bias during analysis.

cs.HC↗