AI 中文总结
该研究通过40名设计师使用4种不同交互模态的调色板工具完成任务的实验，发现工具差异在可访问性约束任务中更显著，部分工具可引导设计师关注可访问性，揭示了调色板设计工具的权衡及其对设计结果的影响。
AI 中文摘要
为数据设计调色板需要设计师平衡可访问性与美观性等多重约束。调色板工具通过直接操作、自动调色板生成与评估、预览等功能支持该过程。尽管这类工具应用广泛，但不同机制如何在不同场景中影响设计的相关研究较少。我们开展了一项探索性的口述思考众包研究，共招募40名自称为设计师的参与者，每位使用4种涵盖不同交互模态的调色板工具之一，完成一系列面向可访问性与美观性的设计任务。我们观察到两个初步模式：第一，在受可访问性约束的任务中，工具间的差异更为显著；第二，即使未明确要求可访问性，部分工具仍能生成更符合可访问性的调色板，并促使设计师进行更多可访问性导向的思考。因此，在这类工具类型中，系统设计既通过内置功能影响结果，也通过引导设计师关注特定约束与设计考量来塑造结果。
英文摘要
Designing a color palette for data requires designers to balance multiple constraints, including accessibility and aesthetics. Color palette tools support this process through features including direct manipulation, automated palette generation and evaluation, previews, and so on. Despite their prominence, relatively little is known about how these different mechanisms shape design across contexts. We conducted an exploratory think-aloud crowd work study with 40 self-identified designers. Each participant used one of four palette tools selected to span different interaction modalities to complete a series of accessibility- and aesthetics-oriented design tasks. We observed two preliminary patterns. First, tool differences were more pronounced in accessibility-constrained tasks. Second, even when accessibility was not explicitly required, some tools produced more accessibility-friendly palettes and prompted more accessibility-oriented thinking. In this tool genre, then, system design shapes outcomes both via built-in functionality, as well as by directing designers' attention toward particular constraints and design considerations.
Comments2 pages, IEEE VIS 2026 POSTER
