PowerPoint® Presentation Flaws and Failures: A Psychological Analysis

Electronic slideshow presentations are often faulted anecdotally, but little empirical work has documented their faults. In Study 1 we found that eight psychological principles are often violated in PowerPoint® slideshows, and are violated to similar extents across different fields – for example, academic research slideshows generally were no better or worse than business slideshows. In Study 2 we found that respondents reported having noticed, and having been annoyed by, specific problems in presentations arising from violations of particular psychological principles. Finally, in Study 3 we showed that observers are not highly accurate in recognizing when particular slides violated a specific psychological rule. Furthermore, even when they correctly identified the violation, they often could not explain the nature of the problem. In sum, the psychological foundations for effective slideshow presentation design are neither obvious nor necessarily intuitive, and presentation designers in all fields, from education to business to government, could benefit from explicit instruction in relevant aspects of psychology.

[1]  David K. Farkas,et al.  Toward a better understanding of PowerPoint deck design , 2006 .

[2]  Tom Janicki,et al.  The dark side of custom animation , 2009 .

[3]  S. Klein,et al.  Spatial frequency channels in human vision as asymmetric (edge) mechanisms. , 1974, Vision research.

[4]  David Travis,et al.  Effective Color Displays: Theory and Practice , 1991 .

[5]  Stephen E. Palmer,et al.  Modern Theories of Gestalt Perception , 1990 .

[6]  M. Chan,et al.  Enhancement of prosthetics and orthotics learning and teaching through e-Learning technology and methodology , 2004, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[7]  Christopher D. Carello,et al.  Target selection and the superior colliculus: goals, choices and hypotheses , 2004, Vision Research.

[8]  Stephen M. Kosslyn,et al.  Clear and to the Point: 8 Psychological Principles for Compelling PowerPoint Presentations , 2007 .

[9]  Gavriel Salvendy,et al.  Information retention from PowerPointTM and traditional lectures , 2009, Comput. Educ..

[10]  N. Schwartz,et al.  Accessing Prior Knowledge to Remember Text: A Comparison of Advance Organizers and Maps , 1998, Contemporary educational psychology.

[11]  Jennifer M. Apperson,et al.  The impact of presentation graphics on students' experience in the classroom , 2006, Comput. Educ..

[12]  Collaborative Recall Reduces the Effect of a Misleading Post Event Narrative , 2009 .

[13]  Colin M. Macleod Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: an integrative review. , 1991, Psychological bulletin.

[14]  Barbara Tversky,et al.  Animation: can it facilitate? , 2002, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[15]  Leslie G. Ungerleider Two cortical visual systems , 1982 .

[16]  Jennifer M. Apperson,et al.  An assessment of student preferences for PowerPoint presentation structure in undergraduate courses , 2008, Comput. Educ..

[17]  Brady Wagoner Narrative Form and Content in Remembering , 2008, Integrative psychological & behavioral science.

[18]  M. Boccia,et al.  The effect of format modifications and reading comprehension on recall of informed consent information by low-income parents: a comparison of print, video, and computer-based presentations. , 2004, Patient education and counseling.

[19]  Attila Szabó,et al.  Using IT in the undergraduate classroom: should we replace the blackboard with PowerPoint? , 2000, Comput. Educ..

[20]  Ben Shneiderman,et al.  Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective Human-Computer Interaction , 1998 .

[21]  Brian Hand,et al.  Comparing student understanding of quantum physics when embedding multimodal representations into two different writing formats: Presentation format versus summary report format , 2006 .

[22]  George Leonard Gropper Text Displays: Analysis and Systematic Design , 1991 .

[23]  Cheri Speier,et al.  The influence of information presentation formats on complex task decision-making performance , 2006, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[24]  Arnold M. Lund,et al.  Expert Ratings of Usability Maxims , 1997 .

[25]  Kevin Fung,et al.  Three-dimensional educational computer model of the larynx: voicing a new direction. , 2009, Archives of otolaryngology--head & neck surgery.

[26]  Malcolm L. Fleming,et al.  Instructional Message Design: Principles from the Behavioral and Cognitive Sciences , 1993 .

[27]  Iris Vessey,et al.  Cognitive Fit: A Theory‐Based Analysis of the Graphs Versus Tables Literature* , 1991 .

[28]  Suzanne Watzman,et al.  Visual design principles for usable interfaces , 2002 .

[29]  C. Dube,et al.  Teaching the testicular exam: a model curriculum from "A" to "Zack". , 2004, Family medicine.

[30]  E. Rosch,et al.  Structural bases of typicality effects. , 1976 .

[31]  Dennis E. Egan,et al.  Handbook of Human Computer Interaction , 1988 .

[32]  Sang Joon Kim,et al.  A Mathematical Theory of Communication , 2006 .

[33]  I. P. Christensen,et al.  Psychophysics , 2019, Encyclopedia of Evolutionary Psychological Science.

[34]  D. Levasseur,et al.  Pedagogy Meets PowerPoint: A Research Review of the Effects of Computer-Generated Slides in the Classroom , 2006 .

[35]  M. Engelmann The Philosophical Investigations , 2013 .

[36]  Joshua E. Susskind Limits of PowerPoint's Power: Enhancing students' self-efficacy and attitudes but not their behavior , 2008, Comput. Educ..

[37]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  The functional anatomy of attention to visual motion. A functional MRI study. , 1998, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[38]  Stephen Michael Kosslyn,et al.  Graph Design for the Eye and Mind , 2006 .

[39]  Robert A. Bartsch,et al.  Effectiveness of PowerPoint presentations in lectures , 2003, Comput. Educ..

[40]  David R. Kniefel,et al.  Review of "Instructional Message Design: Principles from the Behavioral Sciences, by Malcolm Fleming and W. Howard Levie", Educational Technology Publications, Inc. , 1980, SSOC.

[41]  Michael E. McCauley,et al.  HUMAN FACTORS DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR MULTIFUNCTION DISPLAYS , 2001 .

[42]  U. Neisser VISUAL SEARCH. , 1964, Scientific American.

[43]  I. M. Parker,et al.  Absolute PowerPoint: Can a software package edit our thoughts , 2001 .

[44]  Siobhan Chapman Logic and Conversation , 2005 .

[45]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  Why a Diagram is (Sometimes) Worth Ten Thousand Words , 1987, Cogn. Sci..

[46]  M. Hannafin,et al.  Metacognition research and theory: Analysis and implications for instructional design , 1992 .

[47]  J P Thomas,et al.  Bandwidths of orientation channels in human vision. , 1979, Journal of the Optical Society of America.

[48]  John Sweller,et al.  Instructional Design in Technical Areas , 1999 .

[49]  M. Stoner,et al.  PowerPoint in a New Key , 2007 .

[50]  Brian F. Goldiez,et al.  A Paradigm Shift in Interactive Computing: Deriving Multimodal Design Principles from Behavioral and Neurological Foundations , 2004, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[51]  N. Cowan The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity , 2001, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[52]  Ioanna Vekiri What Is the Value of Graphical Displays in Learning? , 2002 .

[53]  George A Alvarez,et al.  How many objects can you track? Evidence for a resource-limited attentive tracking mechanism. , 2007, Journal of vision.

[54]  Macarena Aspillaga Perceptual foundations in the design of visual displays , 1996 .

[55]  P. O. Bishop,et al.  Spatial vision. , 1971, Annual review of psychology.

[56]  Edward E. Smith,et al.  Cognitive Psychology: Mind and Brain , 2006 .

[57]  N. Macmillan,et al.  The mean-integral representation of rectangles , 1998, Perception & psychophysics.

[58]  P. Cavanagh,et al.  The Spatial Resolution of Visual Attention , 2001, Cognitive Psychology.

[59]  M. Posner,et al.  Orienting of Attention* , 1980, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[60]  F. Paas,et al.  Cognitive Architecture and Instructional Design , 1998 .

[61]  S. R. Schmidt,et al.  Can we have a distinctive theory of memory? , 1991, Memory & cognition.

[62]  A. Baddeley Working Memory, Thought, and Action , 2007 .

[63]  Joshua E. Susskind PowerPoint's power in the classroom: enhancing students' self-efficacy and attitudes , 2005, Comput. Educ..

[64]  David L. Sparks,et al.  Movement selection in advance of action in the superior colliculus , 1992, Nature.

[65]  S. Douglas Beets,et al.  Cyber Dimensions: Pedagogical Techniques: Student Performance and Preferences , 2001 .