The visual communication of risk.

This paper 1) provides reasons why graphics should be effective aids to communicate risk; 2) reviews the use of visuals, especially graphical displays, to communicate risk; 3) discusses issues to consider when designing graphs to communicate risk; and 4) provides suggestions for future research. Key articles and materials were obtained from MEDLINE(R) and PsychInfo(R) databases, from reference article citations, and from discussion with experts in risk communication. Research has been devoted primarily to communicating risk magnitudes. Among the various graphical displays, the risk ladder appears to be a promising tool for communicating absolute and relative risks. Preliminary evidence suggests that people understand risk information presented in histograms and pie charts. Areas that need further attention include 1) applying theoretical models to the visual communication of risk, 2) testing which graphical displays can be applied best to different risk communication tasks (e.g., which graphs best convey absolute or relative risks), 3) communicating risk uncertainty, and 4) testing whether the lay public's perceptions and understanding of risk varies by graphical format and whether the addition of graphical displays improves comprehension substantially beyond numerical or narrative translations of risk and, if so, by how much. There is a need to ascertain the extent to which graphics and other visuals enhance the public's understanding of disease risk to facilitate decision-making and behavioral change processes. Nine suggestions are provided to help achieve these ends.

[1]  S. S. Stevens,et al.  Ratio scales and category scales for a dozen perceptual continua. , 1957, Journal of experimental psychology.

[2]  Howard G. Schutz,et al.  An Evaluation of Formats for Graphic Trend Displays—Experiment II1 , 1961 .

[3]  R. Lathrop,et al.  Perceived variability. , 1967, Journal of experimental psychology.

[4]  Daniel Kahneman,et al.  Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability , 1973 .

[5]  Herman Chernoff,et al.  The Use of Faces to Represent Points in k- Dimensional Space Graphically , 1973 .

[6]  Robert J. K. Jacob,et al.  The Face as a Data Display , 1976 .

[7]  Baruch Fischhoff,et al.  Accident probabilities and seat belt usage: A psychological perspective☆ , 1978 .

[8]  L. Ross,et al.  Human Inference: Strategies and Shortcomings of Social Judgment. , 1981 .

[9]  G. A. Miller,et al.  Book Review Nisbett, R. , & Ross, L.Human inference: Strategies and shortcomings of social judgment.Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1980. , 1982 .

[10]  J. Witmer,et al.  Nonlinear Regression Modeling. , 1984 .

[11]  W. Cleveland,et al.  Graphical Perception: Theory, Experimentation, and Application to the Development of Graphical Methods , 1984 .

[12]  Robert M Kaplan,et al.  Patient information processing and the decision to accept treatment. , 1985, Journal of social behavior and personality.

[13]  E C Poulton,et al.  Geometric illusions in reading graphs , 1985, Perception & psychophysics.

[14]  Edward R. Tufte,et al.  The Visual Display of Quantitative Information , 1986 .

[15]  R. Keeney,et al.  Improving risk communication. , 1986, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[16]  P Slovic,et al.  Informing and educating the public about risk. , 1986, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[17]  Robert McGill,et al.  An Experiment in Graphical Perception , 1986, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[18]  David K. Simkin,et al.  An Information-Processing Analysis of Graph Perception , 1987 .

[19]  J Fiksel The impact of artificial intelligence on the risk analysis profession. , 1987, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[20]  Paul Slovic,et al.  Graphic Representation of Judgmental Information , 1986, SGCH.

[21]  M. Granger Morgan,et al.  Graphical Communication of Uncertain Quantities to Nontechnical People , 1987 .

[22]  John Allen Paulos,et al.  Innumeracy: Mathematical Illiteracy and Its Consequences , 1988 .

[23]  William H. Desvousges,et al.  Focus Groups and Risk Communication: The “Science” of Listening to Data , 1988 .

[24]  John A. Sparrow,et al.  Graphical displays in information systems: some data properties influencing the effectiveness of alternative forms , 1989 .

[25]  G E Legge,et al.  Efficiency of graphical perception , 1991, Perception & psychophysics.

[26]  S. Kosslyn Understanding charts and graphs , 1989 .

[27]  S. Hansson Dimensions of Risk , 1989 .

[28]  Ann Fisher,et al.  Communicating risk under title III of SARA: strategies for explaining very small risks in a community context , 1989 .

[29]  D. Halpern,et al.  Using statistical risk information to assess oral contraceptive safety , 1989 .

[30]  Roy O. Freedle,et al.  Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Testing , 1990 .

[31]  C. Melody Carswell Graphical Information Processing: The Effects of Proximity Compatibility , 1990 .

[32]  V. Smith,et al.  Can public information programs affect risk perceptions , 1990 .

[33]  M H Birnbaum,et al.  Judgments of proportions. , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[34]  Edward R. Tufte,et al.  Envisioning Information , 1990 .

[35]  Steven Pinker,et al.  A theory of graph comprehension. , 1990 .

[36]  S. Ellis Pictorial communication in virtual and real environments , 1991 .

[37]  B. Tversky Distortions in memory for visual displays , 1991 .

[38]  S. Lewandowsky,et al.  Displaying proportions and percentages , 1991 .

[39]  Roger E. Kasperson,et al.  Communicating risks to the public : international perspectives , 1991 .

[40]  Stephen M. Casner,et al.  Task-analytic approach to the automated design of graphic presentations , 1991, TOGS.

[41]  Vincent T. Covello,et al.  Risk comparisons and risk communication: Issues and problems in comparing health and environmental risks , 1991 .

[42]  S Epstein,et al.  Cognitive-experiential self-theory and subjective probability: further evidence for two conceptual systems. , 1992, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[43]  S. Krimsky,et al.  Social Theories of Risk , 1992 .

[44]  C M Carswell,et al.  Choosing Specifiers: An Evaluation of the Basic Tasks Model of Graphical Perception , 1992, Human factors.

[45]  J G Hollands,et al.  Judgments of Change and Proportion in Graphical Perception , 1992, Human factors.

[46]  Douglas J. Gillan,et al.  A Componential Model of Human Interaction with Graphs. H. Effects of the Distances among Graphical Elements , 1992 .

[47]  Paul Slovic,et al.  Perception of risk: Reflections on the psychometric paradigm , 1992 .

[48]  D H Hickam,et al.  Patients' and Physicians' Interpretations of Graphic Data Displays , 1993, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[49]  S. Chaiken,et al.  The psychology of attitudes. , 1993 .

[50]  Neil D. Weinstein,et al.  Testing four competing theories of health-protective behavior. , 1993 .

[51]  Gerald L. Lohse,et al.  A Cognitive Model for Understanding Graphical Perception , 1993, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[52]  Peter M. Sandman,et al.  Some criteria for evaluating risk messages , 1993 .

[53]  N. Weinstein Testing four competing theories of health-protective behavior. , 1993, Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association.

[54]  S. Epstein,et al.  Conflict Between Intuitive and Rational Processing: When People Behave Against Their Better Judgment , 1994 .

[55]  Eric R. Stone,et al.  Risk communication: absolute versus relative expressions of low-probability risks , 1994 .

[56]  Andrea H. McMakin,et al.  Risk Communication: A Handbook for Communicating Environmental, Safety, and Health Risks , 1994 .

[57]  P M Sandman,et al.  Testing a visual display to explain small probabilities. , 1994, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[58]  P M Sandman,et al.  High risk or low: how location on a "risk ladder" affects perceived risk. , 1994, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[59]  D J Gillan,et al.  A Componential Model of Human Interaction with Graphs: 1. Linear Regression Modeling , 1994, Human factors.

[60]  William Winn,et al.  Chapter 1 Contributions of Perceptual and Cognitive Processes to the Comprehension of Graphics , 1994 .

[61]  Douglas J. Gillan,et al.  Minimalism and the Syntax of Graphs , 1994 .

[62]  S. Epstein,et al.  Conflict between intuitive and rational processing: when people behave against their better judgment. , 1994, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[63]  P. Slovic,et al.  Presenting uncertainty in health risk assessment: initial studies of its effects on risk perception and trust. , 1995, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[64]  S. Epstein,et al.  The Generality of the Ratio-Bias Phenomenon , 1995 .

[65]  Tom Suraphol Apaiwongse Facial display of environmental policy uncertainty , 1995 .

[66]  Gerd Gigerenzer,et al.  How to Improve Bayesian Reasoning Without Instruction: Frequency Formats , 1995 .

[67]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  The Proximity Compatibility Principle: Its Psychological Foundation and Relevance to Display Design , 1995, Hum. Factors.

[68]  B Fischhoff,et al.  Risk perception and communication unplugged: twenty years of process. , 1995, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[69]  R F Nease,et al.  Perceptions of breast cancer risk and screening effectiveness in women younger than 50 years of age. , 1995, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[70]  John W. Payne,et al.  Do risk information programs promote mitigating behavior? , 1995 .

[71]  Douglas J. Gillan Visual Arithmetic, Computational Graphics, and the Spatial Metaphor , 1995, Hum. Factors.

[72]  Joachim Meyer,et al.  Predicting Values and Trends from Tables and Graphs , 1996 .

[73]  Paul Messaris,et al.  Visual Persuasion: The Role of Images in Advertising , 1996 .

[74]  James K. Doyle,et al.  Judging Cumulative Risk1 , 1997 .

[75]  Michael Siegrist,et al.  Communicating Low Risk Magnitudes: Incidence Rates Expressed as Frequency Versus Rates Expressed as Probability , 1997 .

[76]  Howard Wainer,et al.  Visual Revelations: Graphical Tales of Fate and Deception from Napoleon Bonaparte to Ross Perot , 1997 .

[77]  Eric R. Stone,et al.  Effects of numerical and graphical displays on professed risk-taking behavior. , 1997 .

[78]  Lisa M. Schwartz,et al.  The Role of Numeracy in Understanding the Benefit of Screening Mammography , 1997, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[79]  Kimihiko Yamagishi When a 12.86% Mortality is More Dangerous than 24.14%: Implications for Risk Communication , 1997 .

[80]  Joachim Meyer,et al.  Multiple Factors that Determine Performance with Tables and Graphs , 1997, Hum. Factors.

[81]  R. Glasgow,et al.  Lay Understanding of Synergistic Risk: The Case of Radon and Cigarette Smoking , 1998, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[82]  A. Babrow,et al.  The many meanings of uncertainty in illness: toward a systematic accounting. , 1998, Health communication.

[83]  Peter M. Sandman,et al.  Communications to reduce risk underestimation and overestimation , 1998 .

[84]  K Witte,et al.  Fear, threat, and perceptions of efficacy from frightening skin cancer messages. , 1998, Public health reviews.

[85]  B. Rimer,et al.  Tailoring Communications for Primary Care Settings , 1998, Methods of Information in Medicine.

[86]  Ian Spence,et al.  Judging Proportion with Graphs: The Summation Model , 1998 .

[87]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  Guidelines for Presenting Quantitative Data in HFES Publications , 1998, Hum. Factors.

[88]  Khan Mk,et al.  Health literacy: report of the Council on Scientific Affairs. Ad Hoc Committee on Health Literacy for the Council on Scientific Affairs, American Medical Association. , 1999, JAMA.

[89]  B. Rimer,et al.  Is there a use for tailored print communications in cancer risk communication? , 1999, Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs.

[90]  Brian P. Dyre,et al.  Bias in proportion judgments: the cyclical power model. , 2000, Psychological review.