Understanding Why ChatGPT Outperforms Humans in Visualization Design Advice
This study addresses the problem of understanding AI superiority in visualization design for researchers and practitioners, though it is incremental as it builds on existing comparisons of AI and human performance.
This paper investigates why generative AI models like ChatGPT outperform humans in data visualization advice tasks, finding that ChatGPT-4 combines characteristics from both humans and ChatGPT-3.5, with both models generally favored over human responses due to strengths in coverage, breadth, and technical feedback.
This paper investigates why recent generative AI models outperform humans in data visualization knowledge tasks. Through systematic comparative analysis of responses to visualization questions, we find that differences exist between two ChatGPT models and human outputs over rhetorical structure, knowledge breadth, and perceptual quality. Our findings reveal that ChatGPT-4, as a more advanced model, displays a hybrid of characteristics from both humans and ChatGPT-3.5. The two models were generally favored over human responses, while their strengths in coverage and breadth, and emphasis on technical and task-oriented visualization feedback collectively shaped higher overall quality. Based on our findings, we draw implications for advancing user experiences based on the potential of LLMs and human perception over their capabilities, with relevance to broader applications of AI.