Today the students and I have played around with visualizations in Google Fusion and Manyeyes. Scott has exported data from the ELMCIP Electronic Literature Knowledge Base, so we’ve been making pie charts and timelines and maps and so forth.

Here are the files if you’d like to experiment:

In Google Fusion, you select a kind of visualization from the “Visualize” pulldown menu. This dataset doesn’t have location data so you can’t make maps, I’m afraid, because that information is tied to authors, not to individual works.

Here’s a timeline of  works in the knowledge base that are tagged “hypertext” that Scott put together in Google Fusion:

And here’s a word cloud made from titles of works in the knowledge base, created in Manyeyes:

I hadn’t realised how many of the titles include statements about what genre the work belongs to: book, poem, novel, generator, statement, hypertext, project, letter. I suppose many titles in print literature do the same, come to think of it.

Obviously the dataset comes with biases – it doesn’t (and may never be able to) contain complete information about all electronic literature ever published, and there’s a lot of Young-Hae Chang in there because a student did a project on that group last semester – I actually removed the words “Samsung” and “Korean” from the word cloud because they dwarfed everything else. But it’s interesting to see how it’s relatively easy to do simple visualisations from the data we do have – and to think about what kinds of visualisations we would like to do, and how that might help our research.

In class, we also made a simple map of where the students in this class come from – all over Norway, as you can see, and some other interesting places too. This is very easy to do, you just open a new table, add some place names or addresses to the “location” column and hit “visualize”. We mostly followed this tutorial. You could also upload your own address book, I assume, or other tables with address or location information.

In a way this is just dabbling, and obviously we should all learn a lot more about data visualization to use it properly. But I’m a big believer in having a go at things even before you’re quite sure how to do it – and I think having students who at least have some idea of how they could go about visualizing data is an excellent start. I think it’s also easier to think critically about the biases and sources of the data when we’ve played with the tools ourselves. Maybe some of them will come up with ways of using visualizations usefully in their bachelor theses, or next semester in another paper, or eventually in their MA theses.

 


Discover more from Jill Walker Rettberg

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Leave A Comment

Recommended Posts

screenshot of blogpost from sept 11, 2001, about blogger.com showing blog posts about the attacks
Networked Politics social media

25 years since September 11

I’ve been reading through my blog posts on September 11, 2001 and the days that followed. The things that stand out to me – in addition to the horror of the attack itself – are how massively we (or at least I) used the web to understand what was happening, […]

AI STORIES

AI-generated stories have longer endings than human stories

My colleague Jessica Witte has just shared a preprint where she compared the emotional arcs of the stories we generated using gpt-4o-mini to those of human-authored (pre-2022) stories from the subreddit r/WritingPrompts, conveniently gathered in this dataset. She found a distinct difference in the endings of the LLM-generated stories: both […]

How to peer review a paper in 2026

Dorothy Bishop, a psychologist, wrote a useful list of what reviewers need to look out now that so many papers are bad science that looks good thanks to LLMs. Read her whole blog post, she explains it well, but here’s a brief version because I’m pretty sure we’ll be needing […]

“So what if it was ChatGPT? It *could* have been true!”

I recently read a good article on the different kinds of truth a language model operates with by Luke Mann, Liam Magee and Vanicka Arora, Truth Machines: Synthesizing Veracity in AI Language Models, but despite its lovely typology of truths (consensus, correspondence, coherence and pragmatic) it doesn’t help me with […]

AI STORIES

AI shimmer and sparkle

I have this hunch that sparkles and glow and shimmer are somehow a point in the latent spaces of LLMs that have more connections than you would expect. Perhaps their connotation to magic and to the unknown matches some of the mystique of genAI? Or perhaps these words are used […]