Does Iconicity in Pictographs Matter? The Influence of Iconicity and Numeracy on Information Processing, Decision Making, and Liking in an Eye-Tracking Study.

Researchers recommend the use of pictographs in medical risk communication to improve people's risk comprehension and decision making. However, it is not yet clear whether the iconicity used in pictographs to convey risk information influences individuals' information processing and comprehension. In an eye-tracking experiment with participants from the general population (N = 188), we examined whether specific types of pictograph icons influence the processing strategy viewers use to extract numerical information. In addition, we examined the effect of iconicity and numeracy on probability estimation, recall, and icon liking. This experiment used a 2 (iconicity: blocks vs. restroom icons) × 2 (scenario: medical vs. nonmedical) between-subject design. Numeracy had a significant effect on information processing strategy, but we found no effect of iconicity or scenario. Results indicated that both icon types enabled high and low numerates to use their default way of processing and extracting the gist of the message from the pictorial risk communication format: high numerates counted icons, whereas low numerates used large-area processing. There was no effect of iconicity in the probability estimation. However, people who saw restroom icons had a higher probability of correctly recalling the exact risk level. Iconicity had no effect on icon liking. Although the effects are small, our findings suggest that person-like restroom icons in pictographs seem to have some advantages for risk communication. Specifically, in nonpersonalized prevention brochures, person-like restroom icons may maintain reader motivation for processing the risk information.

High Numerates Count Icons and Low Numerates Process Large Areas in Pictographs: Results of an Eye-Tracking Study.

In two experiments, we investigated the influence of numeracy on individuals' information processing of pictographs depending on numeracy via an eye-tracker. In two conditions, participants from the general population were presented with a scenario depicting the risk of having cancer and were asked to indicate their perceived risk. The risk level was high (63%) in experiment 1 (N = 70) and low (6%) in experiment 2 (N = 69). In the default condition, participants were free to use their default strategy for information processing. In the guiding-toward-the-number condition, they were prompted to count icons in the pictograph by answering with an explicit number. We used eye-tracking parameters related to the distance between sequential fixations to analyze participants' strategies for processing numerical information. In the default condition, the higher the numeracy was, the shorter the distances traversed in the pictograph were, indicating that participants counted the icons. People lower in numeracy performed increased large-area processing by comparing highlighted and nonhighlighted parts of the pictograph. In the guiding-toward-the-number condition, participants used short distances regardless of their numeracy, supporting the notion that short distances represent counting. Despite the different default processing strategies, participants processed the pictograph with a similar depth and derived similar risk perceptions. The results show that pictographs are beneficial for communicating medical risk. Pictographs make the gist salient by making the part-to-whole relationship visually available, and they facilitate low numerates' non-numeric processing of numerical information. Contemporaneously, pictographs allow high numerates to numerically process and rely on the number depicted in the pictograph.