An Overview of Parliamentary Information Visualization (PIV) Initiatives: Assessing their Completeness and Contribution to Parliamentary Openness

Aspasia PapaloiPhD Candidate, Laboratory of New Technologies in Communication, Education and the Mass Media, Faculty of Communication and Media Studies, University of Athens, Greece, apapaloi@media.uoa.gr

Dimitris GouscosAssistant Professor, Laboratory of New Technologies in Communication, Education and the Mass Media, Faculty of Communication and Media Studies, University of Athens, Greece, gouscos@media.uoa.gr

Major points & Methodology

Part I1. Aggregation of 19 PIV initiatives

2. Identification of project scale (European, national, federal, regional)

3. Adaptation based on 4 areas of concern of Parliamentary Informatics (PI) (individual legislators; particular legislative proposals; votes; text of legislation)

4. Outcomes: most common visualized parliamentary information and visualization methods

Part II

5. Setting criteria for PIV completeness

6. Best practices of PIV completeness

7. Overall evaluation of the PIV initiatives and contribution to Parliamentary Openness

Limitations

In terms of the authors: •Subjective point of view as users•Language barriers in understanding,

interpreting or further exploring some visualizations and metadata

In terms of the enablers: •Not 100% verified information •Difficulty in acquiring parliamentary data (via scrapping)

European scale projects

VoteWatch Europe

ParlTrack

It’s Your Parliament.eu

Findings-Part I:

• Complexity of parliamentary function

• Wide range of combination possibilities between parliamentary information and visualization methods

• Variety of visualization methods for each area of concern on PI

• Most common visualization methods: bar charts, pie charts, line charts, data maps, tree maps, timelines, scatterplots, tables, word clouds

• Most common visualized parliamentary information: Information about individual legislators (characteristics, personal data, attendance, activity, performance etc.)

Setting criteria for PIV completeness (according to Dörk, M., Feng, P., Collins, C. & Carpendale, S. (2013))

• Connection Connect and engage viewers via maps, shaping of visualizations etc.

• Disclosure Designer aspirations on visualization effects via ability to exchange views with

enablers, via background information etc.

• Plurality Presentation of multiple aspects & variety of interpretations

• Contingency Flexible visualizations leading to further exploration

• Empowerment Interaction among users, use of information both in digital and physical context,

switch from awareness to civic engagement

Findings-Part II:

• Maps recommended on projects with federal system

• Visualization shaping=Self-exploration & further insights

• Pros and cons for multiple aspects and variety of interpretations

• Data sets with too much information: detailed analysis and

background information

• Interdependence between disclosure and contingency: occasionally lack of further exploration without the provision of background information

1. Connecting with maps: recommended for projects with federal system

(Source: http://www.nossenateurs.fr/)

2.Visualization shaping: self exploration & feeling of further insights

(Source: http://capitolwords.org/?terma=war&termb=peace)

3. Large data sets providing multiple aspects & variety of interpretations:

necessity on detailed analysis and background information(http://parltrack.euwiki.org/dossiers)

4. Interdependence between Disclosure & Contingency: methodology provision enables further exploration

(Source: https://www.govtrack.us/)

Best practices of PIV completeness

French National Assembly (‘Nos Députés’) French Senate (‘Nos Sénateurs’)Italian Chamber of Deputies (Open

Parlamento)European Parliament (VoteWatch Europe)

Connection and contribution of PIV initiatives to

Parliamentary Openness

Provision of information on MPs assets, votes, performance etc.

Provision of information as complete as possible (stating limitations)

Time of data updatingManner of data updating

Continuous effort…

• Teams acquainted with the legislative procedure

• User-centric design

• Guidance and explanation to the user on the selected method, use and expected outcomes

• Provision of both traditional and contemporary means of information sharing

• User motivation for further engagement offline and online

Thank you!

Questions and Comments?

ACCOMPANYING SLIDES

Nos Députéshttp://www.nosdeputes.fr/

Open Parlamentohttp://parlamento17.openpolis.it/

Community

VoteWatch Europehttp://www.votewatch.eu/

Methodology section