Desktop data sonification: Comments on Flowers et al., ICAD 1996

ABSTRACT

Sonification tools have not yet become typical components of data analysis software, despite dramatic advances in sound-production capabilities of personal computers over the past decade. However, we continue to believe that auditory displays have the potential to be highly useful for “small scale” exploration of data for normally sighted users as well as an alternative format for users with visual impairment. Demonstration of effective examples of auditory data displays and design of flexible software tools for data sonification will be key factors in determining the impact of this method of data representation.

REFERENCES

• 1: Brown, L., Brewster, S., Ramloll, R., Riedel, B., and Yu, W. 2002. Browsing modes for exploring sonified line graphs. In Proceedings of British HCI, 2, London, UK.
• 2: Brown, L. M., Brewster, S. A., Ramloll, R., Burton, M., and Riedel, B. 2003. Design guidelines for audio presentation of graphs and tables. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Auditory Display (ICAD 2003), Boston, MA. 284--287.
• 3: Edworthy, J., Hellier, E., and Aldrich, K. 2003. Designing trend-monitoring sounds for helicopters: Methodological issues and an application. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 10, 4, 203--213.
• 4: Flowers, J. H. and Grafel, D. C. 2002. Perception of sonified daily weather records. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomic Society 46th Anuual Meeting, 1579--1583.
• 5: Flowers, J. H. and Hauer, T. A. 1992. The ear's versus the eye's potential to assess characteristics of numeric data: Are we too visuocentric? Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 24, 2, 258--264.
• 6: Flowers, J. H. and Hauer, T. A. 1993. “Soun ” alternatives to visual graphics for exploratory data analysis. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 25, 2, 242--249.
• 7: Flowers, J. H. and Hauer, T. A. 1995. Musical versus visual graphs: Cross-modal equivalence in perception of time series data. Human Factors, 37, 3, 553--569.
• 8: Flowers, J. H., Buhman, D. C., and Turnage, K. D. 1997. Data sonification from the desktop: Should sound be part of standard data analysis software? In Proceedings of the International Conference on Auditory Display (ICAD 1996), 1--7.
• 9: Flowers, J. H., Buhman, D. C., and Turnage, K. D. 1997. Cross-modal equivalence of visual and auditory scatterplots for exploring bivariate data samples. Human Factors, 39, 3, 341--351.
• 10: Flowers, J. H., Whitwer, L. E., Grafel, D. C., and Kotan, C. A. 2001. Sonification of daily weather records: Issues of perception, attention and memory in design choices. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Auditory Display (ICAD 2001), Espoo, Finland. 222--226.
• 11: FREEDOM SCIENTIFIC 2005. JAWS for Windows. St. Petersburg, FL: Freedom Scientific Blind/Low Vision Group.
• 12: Peres, S. and Lane, D. 2003. Sonification of statistical graphs. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Auditory Display (ICAD 2003), Boston, MA. 157--160.
• 13: Walker, B. N. 2002. Magnitude estimation of conceptual data dimensions for use in sonification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 8, 4, 211--221.
• 14: Walker, B. N. and Cothran, J. 2003. Sonification Sandbox: A graphical toolkit for auditory graphs. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Auditory Display (ICAD 2003), Boston, MA. 161--163.

INDEX TERMS

General Terms:
Experimentation, Human Factors, Performance

Keywords:
Sonification, auditory display, data mapping