Further Insight into the Perception of Quantitative Information: Judgments of Gist in Treatment Decisions

Feldman‐Stewart, Deb; Brundage, Michael; Zotov, Vladimir

doi:10.1177/0272989x06297101

Cited by 96 publications

(114 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

104

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…• Fourth, for judging which of two categories is bigger, tables, pie charts and bar charts tend to yield similar accuracy scores (Spence, et al 1991, Meyer, Shinar andLeiser 1997) though another study found that pie charts performed worse than bar charts (Feldman-Stewart, et al 2000). Providing a scale for this task improves accuracy, and providing the numerical value in addition reduced the time needed to complete the task (Feldman- Stewart, Brundage and Zotov 2007). When restricting time, tables perform worse (Spence, et al 1991).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Research has shown that pictographs work well to communicate risks, especially for populations with lower numeracy (Fagerlin, Wang and Ubel 2005, Hawley, et al 2008, Garcia-Retamero and Galesic 2009. Another study comparing icon arrays filled with ovals, single bars (vertical or horizontal), and pie charts (with a single slice) found that a vertical bar chart yielded the greatest comprehension (Feldman -Stewart, et al 2007). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comprehension of Graphs and Tables Depend on the Task: Empirical Evidence from Two Web-Based Studies

Schonlau¹,

Peters²

2012

Statistics, Politics, and Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Graphs and tables are an effective means of communication. However, relatively little experimental work exists examining differences between various formats in how well people understand provided information. We conducted two web-based experiments with a large, diverse sample to explore the effects of display format on respondents' comprehension. We found that comprehension depended on task. Graphs were better for estimating differences; however, tables were better when estimating equality and sums. We found 3D display formats reduced comprehension of pie charts but not of bar charts. Although pie charts never assisted comprehension, they often did not significantly impair comprehension either. Comprehension based on a 3-way table was as good as that for clustered bar charts but was worse for divided bar charts. Information can be conveyed graphically even with 3-way tables, but the choice of display format needs to be sensitive to the task at hand.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comprehension of Graphs and Tables Depend on the Task: Empirical Evidence from Two Web-Based Studies

Schonlau¹,

Peters²

2012

Statistics, Politics, and Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…9,16 These graphics performed better than other formats (such as pie charts and random oval pictographs) with respect to ease (speed) of processing and accuracy. 9,16 However, pictographs were better overall on both tasks. 9 In a second study, 16 numbers, percentages, and referent scales were added to the same graphics to examine their effects on the gist task only.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Influence of Graphic Display Format on the Interpretations of Quantitative Risk Information among Adults with Lower Education and Literacy

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective. To test optimal graphic risk communication formats for presenting small probabilities using graphics with a denominator of 1000 to adults with lower education and literacy. Methods. A randomized experimental study, which took place in adult basic education classes in Sydney, Australia. The participants were 120 adults with lower education and literacy. An experimental computer-based manipulation compared 1) pictographs in 2 forms, shaded ''blocks'' and unshaded ''dots''; and 2) bar charts across different orientations (horizontal/vertical) and numerator size (small \100, medium 100-499, large 500-999). Accuracy (size of error) and ease of processing (reaction time) were assessed on a gist task (estimating the larger chance of survival) and a verbatim task (estimating the size of difference). Preferences for different graph types were also assessed. Results. Accuracy on the gist task was very high across all conditions (.95%) and not tested further. For the verbatim task, optimal graph type depended on the numerator size. For small numerators, pictographs resulted in fewer errors than bar charts (blocks: odds ratio [OR] = 0.047, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.023-0.098; dots: OR = 0.049, 95% CI = 0.024-0.099). For medium and large numerators, bar charts were more accurate (e.g., medium dots: OR = 4.29, 95% CI = 2.9-6.35). Pictographs were generally processed faster for small numerators (e.g., blocks: 14.9 seconds v. bars: 16.2 seconds) and bar charts for medium or large numerators (e.g., large blocks: 41.6 seconds v. 26.7 seconds). Vertical formats were processed slightly faster than horizontal graphs with no difference in accuracy. Most participants preferred bar charts (64%); however, there was no relationship with performance. Conclusions. For adults with low education and literacy, pictographs are likely to be the best format to use when displaying small numerators (\100/1000) and bar charts for larger numerators (.100/1000).

show abstract

“…Bar graphs are one of the most widely used graphical representations in the popular press [Schield 2006]. This format is often understood and preferred by patients for communication of health risks [Fortin et al 2001;Feldman-Stewart et al 2007]. This format was inspired by the use of bar graphs we observed in PatientsLikeMe and Lose It!…”

Section: Hip Design Formats Exploredmentioning

confidence: 99%

Design and Usability of Interactive User Profiles for Online Health Communities

Hartzler

Weis

Cahill

et al. 2016

ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Online health communities provide a rich source of expertise from experienced patients, but uncovering "peer mentors" with shared circumstances is like finding a needle in a haystack-a problem that will escalate as these communities grow and diversify. We investigated interactive health interest profiles (HIPs) that summarize health-related terms extracted from users' community posts. Through iterative design, we explored practical designs that accommodate differences in users' community participation in three HIP prototypes: Text, Word Cloud, and Timeline. By comparing prototype usability with patients and design experts, we found that patients accurately used each prototype but completed some tasks faster with the Timeline HIP. Despite this advantage, patients preferred the Text HIP. Design experts and patients agreed that simple data overviews and granular details with salient cues that invite interactivity are key design considerations for HIPs. Findings offer key design considerations for HIPs that patients find most useful when forging critical connections.

show abstract

Further Insight into the Perception of Quantitative Information: Judgments of Gist in Treatment Decisions

Abstract: For supporting older people's judgments of relative extent, risk information is best presented using vertical bars with a scale; the format systematic ovals with a scale are among the next most easily processed.

Cited by 96 publications

References 41 publications

Comprehension of Graphs and Tables Depend on the Task: Empirical Evidence from Two Web-Based Studies

Comprehension of Graphs and Tables Depend on the Task: Empirical Evidence from Two Web-Based Studies

The Influence of Graphic Display Format on the Interpretations of Quantitative Risk Information among Adults with Lower Education and Literacy

Design and Usability of Interactive User Profiles for Online Health Communities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About