How to Visualize Customer Feedback Data

When I was interviewing users during a study on a new product design focused on comfort, I started to notice some variation in the feedback. Some users seemed quite satisfied, describing it as comfortable and easy to use. Others were more reserved, mentioning small discomforts or saying it didn’t quite feel right. Nothing extreme, but clearly not a uniform experience either. Curious to see how this played out in the larger dataset, I checked the comfort ratings. At first, the average looked perfectly middle-of-the-road. If I had stopped there, I might have just concluded the product was fine for most people. But when I plotted the distribution, the pattern became clearer. Instead of a single, neat peak around the average, the scores were split. There were clusters at both the high and low ends. A good number of people liked it, and another group didn’t, but the average made it all look neutral. That distribution plot gave me a much clearer picture of what was happening. It wasn’t that people felt lukewarm about the design. It was that we had two sets of reactions balancing each other out statistically. And that distinction mattered a lot when it came to next steps. We realized we needed to understand who those two groups were, what expectations or preferences might be influencing their experience, and how we could make the product more inclusive of both. To dig deeper, I ended up using a mixture model to formally identify the subgroups in the data. It confirmed what we were seeing visually, that the responses were likely coming from two different user populations. This kind of modeling is incredibly useful in UX, especially when your data suggests multiple experiences hidden within a single metric. It also matters because the statistical tests you choose depend heavily on your assumptions about the data. If you assume one unified population when there are actually two, your test results can be misleading, and you might miss important differences altogether. This is why checking the distribution is one of the most practical things you can do in UX research. Averages are helpful, but they can also hide important variability. When you visualize the data using a histogram or density plot, you start to see whether people are generally aligned in their experience or whether different patterns are emerging. You might find a long tail, a skew, or multiple peaks, all of which tell you something about how users are interacting with what you’ve designed. Most software can give you a basic histogram. If you’re using R or Python, you can generate one with just a line or two of code. The point is, before you report the average or jump into comparisons, take a moment to see the shape of your data. It helps you tell a more honest, more detailed story about what users are experiencing and why. And if the shape points to something more complex, like distinct user subgroups, methods like mixture modeling can give you a much more accurate and actionable analysis.

My role's core focus is to bridge the gap between data and meaningful insights and understand what decision-makers need and how end users prefer to see and digest information. So, I've been experimenting with different ways to visualize sentiment data in Astrato: Diverging Stacked Bar Chart: Displays customer sentiments from negative to positive. It's an effective tool for quickly seeing how customers rate our products. It clearly shows the balance of opinions, helping to identify which products customers favor or do not favor. Separated Bar Charts: Presents each sentiment category (strongly dislike to strongly like) as separate columns for each product. It enables us to compare the sentiment levels across our range of products, making it clear which aspects receive more positive or negative feedback. The choice of visualization depends on business goals and how the audience can best understand it. Using the right visualizations for your data lets the end user see a clear picture and make informed business decisions. Which do you prefer? #DataVisualization #DataAnalysis #BusinessIntelligence

Tables miss the big picture. Graphs unlock deeper insights. When your data is too complex, key insights stay hidden. 𝗩𝗶𝘀𝘂𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘇𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗯𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴𝘀 𝗰𝗹𝗮𝗿𝗶𝘁𝘆—𝗳𝗮𝘀𝘁. That’s where tools like Neo4j Bloom come in. Visualization platforms transform connected data into an intuitive experience anyone can explore. No complex queries, just patterns and insights at your fingertips. It’s like a search engine for your graph data. Type a name, concept, or relationship and instantly see the connections. If you are using Neo4j and Bloom you can leverage: ✅ 𝗖𝘂𝘀𝘁𝗼𝗺 𝗩𝗶𝗲𝘄𝘀: Adjust node colors, sizes, and labels to match your focus. ✅ 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝗱𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴: Highlight patterns or anomalies with rule-based colors. ✅ 𝗩𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗹𝗲 𝗟𝗮𝘆𝗼𝘂𝘁𝘀: Switch between org charts, geographic maps, and more. These tools become even more powerful when paired with AI. LLM integration turns natural language questions into Cypher queries. For example, asking "Which customers are most likely to churn?" can return high-risk customers in the visualization. Graph visualization tools like Neo4j Bloom bridge the gap between data complexity and business insight. They transform raw data into relationships that drive decisions. Whether you’re conducting fraud investigations or mapping customer journeys, graph visualization gives you the clarity to act. 💬What is your favorite approach to visualizing connected data? Share it in the comments. 📢 Know someone struggling to understand complex data? Share this post to help them out! 🔔 Follow me, Daniel Bukowski, for practical insights about building with connected data.