[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

How We Evaluate the Accessibility of an Infographic: A Pilot Study Through SUS Questionnaire

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Web Information Systems and Technologies (WEBIST 2022)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing ((LNBIP,volume 494))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 226 Accesses

Abstract

The present study aims to evaluate the accessibility of infographics by using the System Usability Scale (SUS) questionnaire, as well as to underline the necessity of new curricula on infographic literacy. The study was conducted on a sample of 200 participants [100 Visual Designer Graduate – 100 Other Disciplines Graduated]. The participants were given a set of infographics to evaluate based on their usability and understandability. The results showed that there were significant differences in the scores based on the level of education of the participants, with higher design education levels leading to better scores. The study also highlighted the importance of developing new curricula on infographic literacy, as the current educational system does not provide enough opportunities for students to learn about infographics and their proper use. This is especially important given the increasing prevalence of infographics in various fields, from journalism to science communication. Without proper education on infographic literacy, individuals may struggle to fully understand and utilize the information presented in infographics, leading to potential misinterpretations or misunderstandings. The findings of this study have important implications for educators and practitioners alike. Educators should prioritize the development of new curricula on infographic literacy to better prepare students for the increasing prevalence of infographics in various fields. Practitioners, on the other hand, should strive to make their infographics more accessible and user-friendly, especially for individuals with lower educational backgrounds.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
£29.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
GBP 19.95
Price includes VAT (United Kingdom)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
GBP 39.99
Price includes VAT (United Kingdom)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
GBP 49.99
Price includes VAT (United Kingdom)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Caccamo, A.: Data visualization, accessibility and graphicacy: a qualitative study of communicative artifacts through SUS questionnaire. In: Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Web Information Systems and Technologies - WEBIST, SciTePress, pp. 422–430 (2022)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Wong, D.M.: The Wall Street Journal Guide to Information Graphics: The Dos and Don’ts of Presenting Data, Facts, and Figures. WW Norton, New York (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Meirelles, I.: Design for Information: An Introduction to the Histories, Theories, and Best Practices Behind Effective Information Visualizations. Rockport Publishers, London (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Dondis, D.A.: Primer of Visual Literacy (Rev. ed.). The MIT Press, Boston (1973)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Zarocostas, J.: How to fight an infodemic. Lancet 395, 676 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  6. WHO. https://www.who.int/news/item/23-09-2020-managing-the-covid-19-infodemic-promoting-healthy-behaviours-and-mitigating-the-harm-from-misinformation-and-disinformation. Accessed 26 Mar 2023

  7. Caccamo, A., Mariani, M.: Data Design: la Comunicazione progettata attraverso i dati. Comunicazione Puntodoc, pp. 138–148 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Jones, B., O’Donnell, K.: Data Literacy Fundamentals: Understanding the Power & Value of Data. Data Literacy Press, Boston (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Marzocca, F.: Il nuovo approccio scientifico verso la transdisciplinarità. Edizioni Mythos, Rome (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Munari, B.: Design e comunicazione visiva. Contributo a una metodologia didattica. Laterza, Milan (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Howard, P. N., Neudert, L., Prakash, N.: Digital misinformation/disinformation and children. United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Guess, A.M.,  Lyons, B.A.: Misinformation, disinformation, and online propaganda. Social Media and Democracy: The State of the Field, Prospects for Reform, pp. 10–33 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Wardle, C., Derakhshan, H.: Information disorder: toward an interdisciplinary framework for research and policy making. Council of Europe Report, 27. Council of Europe, Strasbourg (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Thomson, T.J., Angus, D., Dootson, P., Hurcombe, E., Smith, A.: Visual mis/disinformation in journalism and public communications: current verification practices, challenges, and future opportunities. Journalism Practice, pp. 1–25 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Huff, D.: Mentire con le statistiche. Monti & Ambrosini, Milan (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Jones, B.: Avoiding Data Pitfalls: How to Steer Clear of Common Blunders When Working with Data and Presenting Analysis and Visualizations. Wiley, Hoboken (2019)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  17. Loukissas, Y.A.: All Data Are Local: Thinking Critically in a Data-Driven Society. The MIT Press, Boston (2019)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  18. Cairo, A.: Come i grafici mentono. Capire meglio le informazioni visive. Cortina Raffaello, Milan (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Maldonado, T.: Reale e virtuale. Feltrinelli, Milan (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Manovich, L.: Remixability and Modularity. http://manovich.net/content/04-projects/046-remixability-and-modularity/43_article_2005.pdf. Accessed 26 Mar 2023

  21. Riva, G.: Fake news. Vivere e sopravvivere in un mondo post-verità. Il Mulino, Bologne (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Beattie, V., Jones, M.J.: The impact of graph slope on rate of change judgments in corporate reports. Abacus 38(2), 177–199 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Tufte, E.R.: The visual display of quantitative information (2nd ed.). Graphics Press (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Meyer, J., Shinar, D., Leiser, D.: Multiple factors that determine performance with tables and graphs. Hum. Factors 39, 268–286 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Carpenter, P.A., Shah, P.: A model of the perceptual and conceptual processes in graph comprehension. J. Exp. Psychol. Appl. 4(2), 75 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Cleveland, W.S., McGill, R.: Graphical perception and graphical methods for analyzing scientific data. Science 229(4716), 828–833 (1985)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Freedman, E.G., Shah, P.: Toward a model of knowledge-based graph comprehension. In: Hegarty, M., Meyer, B., Narayanan, N.H. (eds.) Diagrammatic Representation and Inference. Diagrams 2002. LNCS, vol. 2317, pp. 59–141. Springer, Berlin (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-46037-3_3

  28. Glazer, N.: Challenges with graph interpretation: A review of the literature. Stud. Sci. Educ. 47(2), 183–210 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Friel, S.N., Curcio, F.R., Bright, G.W.: Making sense of graphs: Critical factors influencing comprehension and instructional implications. J. Res. Math. Educ. 32(2), 124–158 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Shah, P., Hoeffner, J.: Review of graph comprehension research: Implications for instruction. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 14(1), 47–69 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Lupton, E.: Visual dictionary. In: ABC's of the Bauhaus: The Bauhaus and Design Theory. Princeton Architectural Press, Princerton (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Drucker, J.: Graphesis: Visual Forms of Knowledge Production. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Oliverio, S.: Pedagogia e Visual Education. Unicopli, Milan (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Moholy-Nagy, L.: Vision in Motion. Paul Theobald, Chicago (1946)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Kepes, G.: Il linguaggio della visione, vol. 2. Edizioni Dedalo, Bari (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Bertin, J.: Semiology of Graphics. Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Balchin, W., Coleman, A.M.: Graphicacy should be the fourth ace in the pack. Cartographica. Int. J. Geograph. Inf. Geovisual. 3(1), 23–28 (1966)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Schön, D.: The Reflective Practitioner. Temple-Smith, London (1983)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Culbertson, H.M., Powers, R.D.: A study of graph comprehension difficulties. Audio Vis. Commun. Rev. 7, 97–110 (1959). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02767016

  40. Bowen, G.M., Roth, W.M.: Graph interpretation practices of science and education majors. Can. J. Sci. Math. Technol. Educ. 3(4), 499–512 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Preece, J.: A survey of graph interpretation and sketching errors. Open University

    Google Scholar 

  42. Bowen, G.M., Roth, W.M.: Graph interpretation practices of science and education majors. Can. J. Sci. Math. Technol. Educ. 3(4), 499–512 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Åberg-Bengtsson, L., Ottosson, T.: What lies behind graphicacy? Relating students’ results on a test of graphically represented quantitative information to formal academic achievement. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 43(1), 43–62 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Lau, A., Moere, A.V.: Towards a model of information aesthetics in information visualization. In: 2007 11th International Conference Information Visualization (IV2007), pp. 87–92. IEEE (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  45. Cox, R., Brna, P.: Supporting the use of external representations in problem solving: the need for flexible learning environments. J. Artif. Intell. Educ. 6, 239–302 (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  46. Dahmen, N.S., Mielczarek, N., Perlmutter, D.D.: The influence-network model of the photojournalistic icon. J. Commun. Monographs 20(4), 264–313 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Hemsley, J., Snyder, J.: Dimensions of visual misinformation in the emerging media landscape. In: Southwell, B., Thorson, E.A., Sheble, L. (eds.) Misinformation and Mass Audiences. University of Texas Press, Austin (USA) (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  48. Falcinelli, R.: Critica portatile al visual design: da Gutenberg ai social network: [come informano, narrano e seducono i linguaggi che ci circondano]. Einaudi, Turin (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  49. Brennen, J.S., Simon, F.M., Nielsen, R.K.: Beyond (mis) representation: visuals in COVID-19 misinformation. Int. J. Press/Politics 26(1), 277–299 (2021)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Fontana, A.: Fake news: sicuri che sia falso? Gestire disinformazione, false notizie e conoscenza deformata. Hoepli, Milan (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  51. Eco, U.: Sémiologie des messages visuels. Communications 15(1), 11–51 (1970)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Curcio, F.R.: Comprehension of mathematical relationships expressed in graphs. J. Res. Math. Educ. 18, 382–393 (1987)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Gal, I.: Adults’ statistical literacy: meanings, components, responsibilities. Int. Stat. Rev. 70(1), 1–25 (2002)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  54. Gillies, D., Giorello, G.: La filosofia della scienza del XX secolo. Bari: Laterza (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  55. Cristallo, V., Mariani, M.: From data gate to story gate. Territory visualization models and processes for design driven actions. In: 3rd International Conference on Environmental Design, Mediterranean Design Association, Marsala (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  56. Ware, C.: Visual queries: the foundation of visual thinking. In: Tergan, S.O., Keller, T. (eds.) Knowledge and Information Visualization. LNCS, vol. 3426, pp. 27–35. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/11510154_2

  57. Nickerson, R.S.: Confirmation bias: a ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Rev. Gen. Psychol. 2(2), 175–220 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Kim, A., Moravec, P.L., Dennis, A.R.: Combating fake news on social media with source ratings: the effects of user and expert reputation ratings. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 36(3), 931–968 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Rajsic, J., Wilson, D.E., Pratt, J.: Confirmation bias in visual search. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 41(5), 1353 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Zollo, F., Bessi, A., Del Vicario, M., Scala, A., Caldarelli, G., Shekhtman, L.: Debunking in a world of tribes. PLoS ONE 12(7), e0181821 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Quattrociocchi, W., Vicini, A.: Misinformation. Guida alla società dell’informazione e della credulità. FrancoAngeli, Milan (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  62. Wobbrock, J.O., Hattatoglu, L., Hsu, A.K., Burger, M.A., Magee, M.J.: The Goldilocks zone: young adults’ credibility perceptions of online news articles based on visual appearance. New Rev. Hypermedia Multimedia 27(1–2), 51–96 (2021)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Roth, W.M., McGinn, M.K.: Inscriptions: toward a theory of representing as social practice. Rev. Educ. Res. 68(1), 35–59 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Perondi, L.: Sinsemie: scritture nello spazio. Stampa Alternativa/Nuovi Equilibri, Viterbo (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  65. Anceschi, G.: L’oggetto della raffigurazione. Etaslibri, Milan (1992)

    Google Scholar 

  66. Brooke, J.: SUS: a “quick and dirty” usability. Usab. Eval. Indus. 189(3), 6 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  67. Lewis, J.R., Sauro, J.: Item benchmarks for the system usability scale. J. Usab. Stud. 13(3), 158–167 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  68. Kosslyn, S.M.: Elements of graph design. W.H. Freeman and Company, New York (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  69. Cairo, A.: Uncertainty and graphicacy: how should statisticians, journalists, and designers reveal uncertainty in graphics for public consumption?. In: Errea, J.G. (ed.) Visual Journalism: Infographics from the World’s Best Newsrooms and Designers (Translation ed.). Gestalten, Neustadt (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  70. Horn, R.E.: Visual language: global communication for the 21st century. MacroVU, Bainbridge Island (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  71. Wilmot, D.: Investigating children’s graphic skills: a south african case study. Int. Res. Geograp. Environ. Educ. 11(4), 325–340 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Carretero Gomez, S., Vuorikari, R., Punie, Y.: DigComp 2.1: the digital competence framework for citizens with eight proficiency levels and examples of use. EUR 28558 EN. Publications Office of the European Union, London (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  73. Danos, X.: Graphicacy and Culture: Refocusing on Visual Learning. Design Press Ltd., Loughborough (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  74. Thompson, D.S.: Teaching students to critically read digital images: a visual literacy approach using the DIG method. J. Vis. Literacy 38(1–2), 110–119 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Mauri, M., Colombo, G., Briones, M.D.L.Á., Ciuccarelli, P.: Teaching the critical role of designers in the data society: the DensityDesign approach. In Börekçi, N., Koçyıldırım, D., Korkut, F. Jones, D. (eds.) Insider Knowledge, DRS Learn X Design Conference 2019, pp. 9–12 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Planning, Design, Technology of Architecture, Sapienza – University of Rome, 00193, Rome, RM, Italy

    Alessio Caccamo

Authors
  1. Alessio Caccamo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alessio Caccamo .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Padua (UNIPD), Padua, Italy

    Massimo Marchiori

  2. University of Seville, Seville, Spain

    Francisco José Domínguez Mayo

  3. Polytechnic Institute of Setúbal/INSTICC, Setubal, Portugal

    Joaquim Filipe

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Caccamo, A. (2023). How We Evaluate the Accessibility of an Infographic: A Pilot Study Through SUS Questionnaire. In: Marchiori, M., Domínguez Mayo, F.J., Filipe, J. (eds) Web Information Systems and Technologies. WEBIST 2022. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 494. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-43088-6_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-43088-6_12

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-43087-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-43088-6

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation