Supporting Story Synthesis: Bridging the Gap between Visual Analytics and Storytelling

Visual analytics usually deals with complex data and uses sophisticated algorithmic, visual, and interactive techniques. Findings of the analysis often need to be communicated to an audience that lacks visual analytics expertise. This requires analysis outcomes to be presented in simpler ways than that are typically used in visual analytics systems. However, not only analytical visualizations may be too complex for target audience but also the information that needs to be presented. Hence, there exists a gap on the path from obtaining analysis findings to communicating them, which involves two aspects: information and display complexity. We propose a general framework where data analysis and result presentation are linked by story synthesis, in which the analyst creates and organizes story contents. Differently, from the previous research, where analytic findings are represented by stored display states, we treat findings as data constructs. In story synthesis, findings are selected, assembled, and arranged in views using meaningful layouts that take into account the structure of information and inherent properties of its components. We propose a workflow for applying the proposed framework in designing visual analytics systems and demonstrate the generality of the approach by applying it to two domains, social media, and movement analysis

The Disparity Between Scientific Consensus and American Public Opinion of Genetically Modified Organisms and Genetic Engineering

Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and genetic engineering (GE) are accepted as safe and useful by the consensus of the scientific community. Their diverse utility has shown promise in addressing major challenges of the 21st century, including world hunger, global warming, and the prevalence of diet-related diseases (e.g. heart disease, cancer, diabetes, etc.). A 2014 Pew Research Center survey revealed that while 88% of scientists agreed that GM foods were safe to eat, only 37% of American consumers agreed. Furthermore, only 35% of U.S. adults trusted scientists to accurately inform the public about GMOs. To explain this disparity, I synthesize information about stakeholders in GMOs and GE, demographics linked to acceptance and denial, interpretation of scientific consensus, psychological mechanisms controlling bias, and poor practice of science. Analysis reveals that the disparity in GMO and GE perception between the scientific community and the American public was caused by bad science, foreign political agendas, profit-driven media, and psychological factors, such as intuitive expectations, soft attitudes, and the backfire effect; furthermore, I show that despite innate conduits for bias development, educated, high income, and youthful demographics will shrink the gap between scientific consensus and public opinion if GMO education and equal access to education increase

A summary of research relating to reading in the intermediate grades

Purpose: To develop and evaluate a method of quick perception with geography vocabulary to see if; (a) quick perception accelerates growth in comprehension, (b) effects speed of reading, and (c) improves reading ability. Materials used: (1) Vocabulary selected from: a) Atwood, The Americas, b) McConnel, Living in the Americas, c) Smith, World Folk. (2) Durrell-Sullivan Achievement Tests, Intermediate Forms A and B. (3) Oral Reading Tests for Speed from the "Durrell Analysis of Reading Difficulty". (4) Silent Reading and Vocabulary Inventory Tests constructed by the writer. (5) Lantern slide projector; screen; words and phrases typed on amber cellphone, faced with red carbon paper, enclosed in glass slides, hinged with tape at the top [TRUNCATED

Sensitivity analysis in a scoping review on police accountability : assessing the feasibility of reporting criteria in mixed studies reviews

In this paper, we report on the findings of a sensitivity analysis that was carried out within a previously conducted scoping review, hoping to contribute to the ongoing debate about how to assess the quality of research in mixed methods reviews. Previous sensitivity analyses mainly concluded that the exclusion of inadequately reported or lower quality studies did not have a significant effect on the results of the synthesis. In this study, we conducted a sensitivity analysis on the basis of reporting criteria with the aims of analysing its impact on the synthesis results and assessing its feasibility. Contrary to some previous studies, our analysis showed that the exclusion of inadequately reported studies had an impact on the results of the thematic synthesis. Initially, we also sought to propose a refinement of reporting criteria based on the literature and our own experiences. In this way, we aimed to facilitate the assessment of reporting criteria and enhance its consistency. However, based on the results of our sensitivity analysis, we opted not to make such a refinement since many publications included in this analysis did not sufficiently report on the methodology. As such, a refinement would not be useful considering that researchers would be unable to assess these (sub-)criteria