Participatory Data Physicalization: A New Space to Inform

  • Matteo MorettiEmail author
  • Alvise MattozziEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 1140)


The paper proposes a reflection on how to analyze, assess and design Participatory Data Physicalization (PDP) by taking into consideration a PDP project designed by one of the authors of the paper and commissioned by Prevention For You, a startup specialized in prevention education. For Data Physicalization we intend the translation of data into tangible and, in any case, perceptible-with-senses-other-than-vision artifacts. Data Physicalization allows for an engagement of the recipient of information which differ from that of Data Visualization. By exploiting and exploring these different forms of engagement, which often entail the involvement of the entire body, Data Physicalization can give way to artifacts that dispose and afford participation. PDP can be then a way to promote participation and to democratize data beyond a broader diffusion and deeper understanding of information. The paper discusses all these issues by taking into account the PDP project “ – more knowledge, less fear” about cancer awareness.


Awareness Data Physicalization Data Visualization Participation Healthcare 


  1. Akrich, M.: The description of technical objects. In: Bijker, W.E., Law, J. (eds.) Shaping Technology/Building Society, pp. 205–224. MIT Press, Cambridge (1992)Google Scholar
  2. Akrich, M., Latour, B.: A summary of convenient vocabulary for the semiotics of human and nonhuman assemblies. In: Bijker, W.E., Law, J. (eds.) Shaping Technology/building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change, pp. 259–264. MIT Press, Cambridge (1992)Google Scholar
  3. Bastide, F.: The iconography of scientific texts: principles of analysis. In: Lynch, M., Woolgar, S. (eds.) Representation in Scientific Practice, pp. 187–229. MIT Press, Cambridge (1990)Google Scholar
  4. Bastide, F.: Una notte con Saturno. Scritti semiotici sul discorso scientifico. Meltemi, Roma (2001)Google Scholar
  5. Bennett, P., Fraser, M., Balaam, M.: ChronoTape: tangible timelines for family history. In: Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded and Embodied Interaction, pp. 49–56. ACM, New York (2012).
  6. Bernhaupt, R., Pirker, M., Desnos, A.: The bubble user interface: a tangible representation of information to enhance the user experience in IPTV systems. In: Proceedings of the 2014 Companion Publication on Designing Interactive Systems, pp. 85–88. ACM, New York (2014).
  7. Bertin, J.: Sémiologie Graphique. Mouton, Paris (1967)Google Scholar
  8. Cabitza, F., Mattozzi, A.: The semiotics of configurations for the immanent design of interactive computational systems. J. Visual Lang. Comput. 40, 65–90 (2017).
  9. Cairo, A.: The Functional Art: An Introduction to Information Graphics and Visualization. New Riders, Berkeley (2013)Google Scholar
  10. Chatenet, L., Mattozzi, A. (eds.): Rhéthorique et visualization scientifique, monographic issue of Visible 10. Pulim, Limoges. ISBN: 978-28-428-7597-8 (2013)Google Scholar
  11. Coopmans, C., Vertesi, J., Lynch, M., Woolgar, S. (eds.): Representation in Scientific Practice Revisited. MIT Press, Cambridge (2014)Google Scholar
  12. Cuendet, S., Bumbacher, E., Dillenbourg, P.: Tangible vs. virtual representations: when tangibles benefit the training of spatial skills. In: Proceedings of the 7th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Making Sense Through Design, pp. 99–108. ACM, New York (2012).
  13. Dondero, M.G., Fontanille, J.: Des images à problemès. Le sens du visuel a l’épreuve de l’image scientifique. Pulim, Limoges (2012)Google Scholar
  14. Emanuel, A.S., Kiviniemi, M.T., Howell, J.L., Hay, J.L., Waters, E.A., Orom, H., Shepperd, J.A.: Avoiding cancer risk information. Soc. Sci. Med. 147, 113–120 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fontanille, J.: Les Espaces subjectifs?: introduction à la sémiotique de l’observateur. Hachette, Paris (1989)Google Scholar
  16. Golman, R., Loewenstein, G.: Curiosity, information gaps, and the utility of knowledge (2015)Google Scholar
  17. Goodwin, C.: Professional vision. Am. Anthropol. 96(3), 606–633 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Goodwin, C.: Il senso del vedere. Meltemi, Roma (2003)Google Scholar
  19. Group, T.M.: Tangibles at play. In: ACM SIGGRAPH 2006 Emerging Technologies. ACM, New York (2006).
  20. Hartmann, F.: Visualizing social facts: Otto Neurath's ISOTYPE project. In: European Modernism and the Information Society, pp. 279–293. Routledge (2017)Google Scholar
  21. Jansen, Y., Dragicevic, P., Isenberg, P., Alexander, J., Karnik, A., Kildal, J., … Hornbæk, K.: Opportunities and challenges for data physicalization, pp. 3227–3236. ACM Press (2015).
  22. Judelman, G.: Aesthetics and inspiration for visualization design: bridging the gap between art and science. In: Proceedings of the Information Visualisation, Eighth International Conference, pp. 245–250. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC (2004).
  23. Latour, B.: Science in Action. How to Follow Scientist and Engineers Through Society. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1987)Google Scholar
  24. Latour, B.: Where are the missing masses? The sociology of a few mundane artifacts. In: Bijker, W.E., Law, J. (eds.) Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change, pp. 225–258. MIT Press, Cambridge (1992)Google Scholar
  25. Latour, B.: Visualization and cognition. Drawing things together. In: Lynch, M., Woolgar, S. (eds.) Representation in Scientific Practice, pp. 19–68. MIT Press, Cambridge (1990)Google Scholar
  26. Latour, B.: Pandora’s Hope. Essays on the Reality of Science Studies. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1999)Google Scholar
  27. Latour, B.: La semiotica dei testi scientifici dopo il lavoro di Françoise Bastide. In: E/C (2011).
  28. Latour, B., Weibel, P. (eds.): Making Things Public. Atmospheres of Democracy. The MIT Press, Cambridge (2005)Google Scholar
  29. Loewenstein, G.: The psychology of curiosity: a review and reinterpretation. Psychol. Bull. 116(1), 75 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lynch, M., Woolgar, S. (eds.): Representation in Scientific Practice. MIT Press, Cambridge (1990)Google Scholar
  31. Manchia, V. (ed.): Immagini che fanno segno. Modi e pratiche di rappresentazione diagrammatica nelle informational images. La casa Usher, Firenze (2015)Google Scholar
  32. Marres, N.: Material Participation. Technology, the Environment and Everyday Public. Palgrave, London (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mangano, D.: Semiotica e Design. Carocci, Roma (2009)Google Scholar
  34. Manzini, E.: Design When Everybody Design. MIT Press, Cambridge (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Mattozzi, A.: The semiotic analysis of objects: a model. In: Vihma, S. (ed.) Design Semiotics in Use, pp. 40–69. Aalto University Press, Helsinki (2010)Google Scholar
  36. Mattozzi, A.: Semiotics’ Razor. Or, How to Tell Products’ Signification Apart From Products’ Communication. MEI Mediat. Inf. 40 (2017).
  37. Moere, A.V.: Beyond the tyranny of the pixel: exploring the physicality of information visualization. In: Proceedings of the 2008 12th International Conference Information Visualisation, pp. 469–474. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC (2008).
  38. Moere, A.V., Patel, S.: The physical visualization of information: designing data sculptures in an educational context. In: Huang, M.L., Nguyen, Q.V., Zhang, K. (eds.) Visual Information Communication, pp. 1–23. Springer (2009).
  39. Neurath, M., Kinross, R.: The Transformer Principles of Making Isotype Charts. Hyphen Press, London (2009)Google Scholar
  40. Perrotta, M.: The study of technoscientific imaging in STS. Tecnoscienza Ital. J. Sci. Technol. Stud. 3(2), 163–175 (2012)Google Scholar
  41. Rezaeian, A., Donovan, J.: Design of a tangible data visualization. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Symposium on Visual Information Communication and Interaction, pp. 232:232–232:235. ACM, New York (2014).
  42. Spence, I.: William Playfair and the psychology of graphs. Am. Stat. Assoc. JSM Proc. 2006, 2426–2436 (2006)Google Scholar
  43. Stusak, S., Aslan, A.: Beyond physical bar charts: an exploration of designing physical visualizations. In: CHI 2014 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1381–1386. ACM, New York (2014).
  44. Stusak, S., Hobe, M., Butz, A.: If your mind can grasp it, your hands will help, pp. 92–99. ACM Press (2016).
  45. Stusak, S., Schwarz, J., Butz, A.: Evaluating the memorability of physical visualizations, pp. 3247–3250. ACM Press (2015).
  46. Sweeny, K., Melnyk, D., Miller, W., Shepperd, J.A.: Information avoidance: who, what, when, and why. Rev. Gen. Psychol. 14(4), 340 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Trevor Hogan, E.H.: How does representation modality affect user-experience of data artifacts?, pp. 141–151 (2012).
  48. Tufte, E.R.: The Visual Display of Quantitative Information. Graphics Press, Cheshire (1983)Google Scholar
  49. Uyan Dur, B.İ.: Otto Neurath, ISOTYPE picture language and its reflections on recent design. In: International Trend and Issues in Communication and Media, Dubai, UAE (2014)Google Scholar
  50. Zhao, J., Moere, A.V.: Embodiment in data sculpture: a model of the physical visualization of information. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Digital Interactive Media in Entertainment and Arts, pp. 343–350. ACM, New York (2008).

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Design and ArtFree University of Bozen-BolzanoBolzanoItaly

Personalised recommendations