Suggesting motion in health communication pictures: The effect of pictorial and extra-pictorial manipulation

Abstract The static character of pictures often contrasts sharply with the dynamic nature of the message they are meant to convey. Suggesting motion in static pictures is particularly important in communicative contexts in which vital messages and instructions need to be transmitted, for example in the context of health-intervention programmes. Pictures are often the main carriers of health-related messages, for instance when oral or video transmission is not available, or when written information is not accessible because the target group lacks the necessary reading skills. The present study investigates the effect of different design strategies used to suggest motion in static pictures. It compares the suggestive manipulation of iconic pictorial elements (i.e. the suggestive depiction of body parts, bodily expressions and postures) with the use of extra-pictorial (noniconic) devices (such as movement lines or arrows). In study 1, two groups of respondents were presented with one of two versions of the same motion-suggesting pictures: pictures with hands only, and pictures with hands and arrows added. In study 2, an extra group of respondents was exposed to a third version of the same pictures: pictures with arrows only. The results of study 1 reveal that the use of arrows results in a somewhat better recognition of motion and intended motion. However, this effect is small and applies mainly to respondents with relatively higher literacy levels. The results of study 2 show that arrows alone are far less efficient as motion cues than the other two variants. Furthermore, the comments of respondents reveal that arrows are noticed and mentioned far less often as motion cues than body parts or objects involved in the action.

[1]  Ros Dowse,et al.  The influence of education on the interpretation of pharmaceutical pictograms for communicating medicine instructions , 2003 .

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

[3]  Theo van Leeuwen,et al.  Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design , 1996 .

[4]  M D Shepherd,et al.  Design, development, and evaluation of visual aids for communicating prescription drug instructions to nonliterate patients in rural Cameroon. , 1997, Patient education and counseling.

[5]  J. Gibson.  The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception , 1979 .

[6]  Barbara Tversky,et al.  Arrows in Comprehending and Producing Mechanical Diagrams , 2006, Cogn. Sci..

[7]  S. Ainsworth,et al.  Multiple Forms of Dynamic Representation. , 2004 .

[8]  Myke Gluck,et al.  Visual Explanations: Images and Quantities, Evidence and Narrative , 1997, Inf. Process. Manag..

[9]  Robert E. Horn,et al.  Visual Language: Global Communication for the 21st Century , 1998 .

[10]  Volker Haarslev,et al.  Theory and Application of Diagrams , 2003, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[11]  R. Jackendoff.  On beyond Zebra: The relation of linguistic and visual information , 1987, Cognition.

[12]  Paul U. Lee,et al.  Lines, Blobs, Crosses and Arrows: Diagrammatic Communication with Schematic Figures , 2000, Diagrams.

[13]  John A. Bateman,et al.  Multimodality and Genre: A Foundation for the Systematic Analysis of Multimodal Documents , 2008 .

[14]  John A. Bateman,et al.  Multimodality and Genre , 2008 .

[15]  Barbara Tversky,et al.  Some Ways that Maps and Diagrams Communicate , 2000, Spatial Cognition.

[16]  Edward Rolf Tufte,et al.  The visual display of quantitative information , 1985 .

[17]  Max J. Egenhofer,et al.  Structure and Semantics of Arrow Diagrams , 2005, COSIT.

[18]  L. G. Doak,et al.  Teaching Patients With Low Literacy Skills , 1985 .

[19]  Alfons Maes,et al.  Visual health communication. How do low literate audiences understand visual meaning , 2008 .

[20]  Rolf A. Zwaan,et al.  Grounding Cognition: Introduction to Grounding Cognition: The Role of Perception and Action in Memory, Language, and Thinking , 2005 .

[21]  A. Maes,et al.  Understanding visuals in HIV/AIDS education in South Africa: differences between literate and low-literate audiences , 2006, African journal of AIDS research : AJAR.

[22]  L. G. Doak,et al.  The role of pictures in improving health communication: a review of research on attention, comprehension, recall, and adherence. , 2006, Patient education and counseling.

[23]  Douglas R. MacKinnon.  Is a Picture Always Worth a Thousand Words? , 1987, Int. CMG Conference.

[24]  Ros Dowse,et al.  Pictograms for conveying medicine instructions: comprehension in various South African language groups , 2004 .