Cited by 89Data Visualization and AnalyticsDecision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsVisual and Cognitive Learning Processes

The Attraction Effect in Information Visualization

Open access
Dimara, Evanthia, Bezerianos, Anastasia, Dragicevic, Pierre·2017·IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics

Abstract

The attraction effect is a well-studied cognitive bias in decision making research, where one's choice between two alternatives is influenced by the presence of an irrelevant (dominated) third alternative. We examine whether this cognitive bias, so far only tested with three alternatives and simple presentation formats such as numerical tables, text and pictures, also appears in visualizations. Since visualizations can be used to support decision making - e.g., when choosing a house to buy or an employee to hire - a systematic bias could have important implications. In a first crowdsource experiment, we indeed partially replicated the attraction effect with three alternatives presented as a numerical table, and observed similar effects when they were presented as a scatterplot. In a second experiment, we investigated if the effect extends to larger sets of alternatives, where the number of alternatives is too large for numerical tables to be practical. Our findings indicate that the bias persists for larger sets of alternatives presented as scatterplots. We discuss implications for future research on how to further study and possibly alleviate the attraction effect.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/tvcg.2016.2598594

Cites

62 of 62 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In higher-level decision tasks, visualization design influences data interpretation and decision making.

    “In higher-level decision tasks, visualization design also influences data interpretation and decision making [9, 4].”

    From Illusion of Causality in Visualized Data (2020) · cites this paper as [9]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dimara, E., Bezerianos, A., & Dragicevic, P.
Affiliations
  • Université Paris-Sud (FR)
  • Institut national de recherche en sciences et technologies du numérique (FR)
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics
Published
2017-01
Volume
23
Issue
1
Pages
471-480
ISSN
1077-2626 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2513374982
Cited by
89
References
62
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 1
FWCI
8.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Data Visualization and Analytics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
Keywords
attraction effect, cognitive biases, decision-making, information visualization, scatter plots, mathematical tables

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review