What Is an Effective Knowledge Visualization? Insights from a Review of Seminal Concepts

  • Martin J. EpplerEmail author


The domain of knowledge visualization (KV) focuses on the collaborative use of interactive graphics to create, integrate, and apply knowledge. This emerging approach nevertheless builds on decades of research on using images collaboratively for sense making and knowledge sharing. In this chapter, we review the seminal concepts from different disciplines that help to explain how visualizations can effectively act as collaboration catalysts and knowledge integrators. Our review makes it apparent that many different labels and conceptions exist in very different domains to explain the same phenomenon: the integrative power of visuals for knowledge-intensive collaboration processes. These concepts can be used to compile a list of the requirements of an effective KV. We conclude this chapter by showing the theoretical and practical implications of this review.


Boundary Object Visual Guidance Visual Variety Visual Discovery Transitional Object 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Bresciani, S., Blackwell, A.F., Eppler, M.J.: A collaborative dimensions framework: understanding the mediating role of conceptual visualizations in collaborative knowledge work. In: Proceedings of the 41st Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS 2008). IEEE Press, Hawaii (2008)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cook, S.D.N., Brown, J.S.: Bridging epistemologies: the generative dance between organizational knowledge and organizational knowing. Organ. Sci. 10(4), 381–400 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Eden, C., Ackermann, F.: Making Strategy: The Journey of Strategic Management. Sage, London (1998)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Eden, C. Ackermann, F.: Where next for problem structuring methods. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 57(7), 766–768 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Elkins, J.: The Domain of Images. Cornell University Press, Ithaca (1999)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Eppler, M.J., Burkard, R.A.: Knowledge visualization. Towards a new discipline and its fields of application. In: Schwartz, D.G. (ed.) Encyclopedia of Knowledge Management. Idea Group, Hershey (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Eppler, M.J., Burkhard, R.A.: Visual representations in knowledge management: framework and cases. J. Knowl. Manage. 4(11), 112–122 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Goodman, N.: Languages of Art. Oxford University Press, London (1969)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Green, T.R.G.: Usability Analysis of visual programming environments: a cognitive dimensions framework. J. Visual. Lang. Comput. 7(2), 131–174 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Henderson, K.: Flexible Sketches and Inflexible data bases: visual communication, conscription devices, and boundary objects in design engineering. Sci. Technol. Human. Values. 16, 448–473 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hoffmann, M.H.G.: Peirce’s “Diagrammatic Reasoning” as a solution of the learning paradox. In: Guy, D. (ed.) Process Pragmatism: Essays on a Quiet Philosophical Revolution, pp. 121–143. Rodopi, Amsterdam (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Horn, R.E.: Visual Language: Global Communication for the 21st Century. MacroVU Press, Bainbridge Island (1998)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kaptelinin, A.: Acting with Technology—Activity Theory and Interaction Design. MIT Press, Cambridge (2006)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Knorr-Cetina, K.: Epistemic Cultures. How the Sciences Make Knowledge [1999]. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (2003)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Latour, B.: Visualisation and cognition: drawing things together. In: Michael, L., Steve, W (eds.) Representation in Scientific Activity, pp. 19–68. MIT Press, Cambridge (1990)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Orlikowski, W.J.: Material knowing: the scaffolding of human knowledgeability. Eur. J. Inform. Syst. 5(15), 460–466 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Orlikowski, W.J.: Sociomaterial practices: exploring technology at work. Organ. Stud. 9(28), 1435–1448 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Star, S.L., Griesemer, J.R.: Institutional ecology, ‘Translations’ and boundary objects: amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s museum of vertebrate zoology. Soc. Stud. Sci. 19(4), 387–420 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Suchman, L.: Affiliative objects. Organization. 12(3), 379–399 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Suthers, D.D.: Towards a systematic study of representational guidance for collaborative learning discourse. J. Univers. Comput. Sci. 7(3), 254–277 (2001)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tufte, E.R.: Visual Explanations. Graphics Press, Cheshire (1997)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Tversky, B.: Visuospatial reasoning. In: Holyoak, K., Morrison, R. (eds.) The Cambridge Handbook of Thinking and Reasoning, Chap. 10. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2005)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Media and Communications ManagementUniversity of St. GallenSt. GallenSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations