  While visualizations are an effective way to represent insights about
information, they rarely stand alone. When designing a visualization, text is
often added to provide additional context and guidance for the reader. However,
there is little experimental evidence to guide designers as to what is the
right amount of text to show within a chart, what its qualitative properties
should be, and where it should be placed. Prior work also shows variation in
personal preferences for charts versus textual representations. In this paper,
we explore several research questions about the relative value of textual
components of visualizations. 302 participants ranked univariate line charts
containing varying amounts of text, ranging from no text (except for the axes)
to a written paragraph with no visuals. Participants also described what
information they could take away from line charts containing text with varying
semantic content. We find that heavily annotated charts were not penalized. In
fact, participants preferred the charts with the largest number of textual
annotations over charts with fewer annotations or text alone. We also find
effects of semantic content. For instance, the text that describes statistical
or relational components of a chart leads to more takeaways referring to
statistics or relational comparisons than text describing elemental or encoded
components. Finally, we find different effects for the semantic levels based on
the placement of the text on the chart; some kinds of information are best
placed in the title, while others should be placed closer to the data. We
compile these results into four chart design guidelines and discuss future
implications for the combination of text and charts.
