Contextual note: this post is one of several on the memorability debate. The process of reviewing papers is relevant in this memorability discussion, since the Few15 critique specifically called into question whether the peer review process at InfoVis yields appropriate quality. Advertisements
Contextual note: this post is one of several on the memorability debate. Punching Up vs Punching Down
Contextual note: this post is one of several on the memorability debate. I think of science as a conversation that is carried out through paper-sized units. Any single paper can only do so much – it must have finite scope, so that the work behind it can be done in finite time and described in […]
I’m writing a series of posts in response to a still-unfolding debate and conversation within the visualization community that was catalyzed by two newsletter/blog posts from Stephen Few.
I’ve fallen in love with Data Stories over the past year. For those (poor benighted souls) who haven’t heard of it before, it’s a bi-weekly podcast about visualization. It is a splendid collaboration between academic Enrico Bertini, whose blog is Fell In Love With Data, and practitioner Moritz Stefaner, whose site is Truth & Beauty.