Information Graphics

1. Look at the following information graphic broken down into a series of 4 images and answer the following questions:

The original photograph is called “Skull with cigarette, 2007” by Chris Jordan. It has a caption below the photogtaphs which reads: “Depicts 200,000 packs of cigarettes, equal to the number of Americans who die from cigarette smoking every six months”. Why didn’t the photographer just present the information in numbers? Why explain the statistics in graphical form? 

Answer:

Infographic may carry complicated messages strongly, clearly and straightforwardly (Woo, 2010).

A more modern meaning of graphic design comprises the art of communication to notify, teach, effect, convince and give a visual experience (Almeida, 2009, pg.15 as cited from Resnick, 2003).

Some studies state that extra additional graphic pictorial warning representation reinforce and support smokers’ plans to stop smoking (Kees, Burton, Andrews & Kozup, 2010).

Display would be more effective to persuade the viewers to watch and have an idea about the statistics shown rather than put it in numbers (Chua, Yates & Shah, 2006). Graphics are particularly powerful and working tools for risk communication such as those diagrams above. The statistics of applying graph is work and crucial in order for people to realize about the danger of smoking (Chua, Yates & Shah, 2006 as cited from Covello, Sandman & Siovic, 1988; Keeney & Von Winterfeldt, 1986). It has been predicted that the decisions made based on graphical presentation would be ok.

“Graphical risk displays induce significantly greater risk avoidance than do numerical displays which means the viewers were willing to pay significantly more when the chances of harm were displayed graphically than when they were displayed numerically” (Chua, Yates & Shah, 2006).

A research has found that information from graphical presentation is operated much quickly or easy to remembers than information from numerical presentation. In the process of automatic perception, people’s attention is captured first to the visual display. “Memory gives a window on cognitive representations of alternatives” (Chua, Yates & Shah, 2006 as cited from Jarvenpaa, 1990).

REFERENCES

-Almeida, C.D. (2009). Journal of Visual Literacy. The Rhetorical Genre in Graphic Design: Its Relationship to Design Authorship and Implications to Design Education, 28 (2), pp.186-198. Accessed on November 5, 2012 from University Brunei Darussalam Ebrary Books Website.

-Chua, H.F., Yates, J.F. & Shah, P. (2006). Memory & Cognition. Risk avoidance: Graphs versus Numbers, 34 (2), pp.399-410.Accessed on November 5, 2012 from University Brunei Darussalam Ebrary Books Website.

-Kees, J., Burton, S., Andrews, C.J & Kozup, J. (2010). Journal of Public Policy & Marketing. Understanding How Graphic Pictorial Warnings work on cigarette packaging, 29 (2), pp.265-276. Accessed on November 5, 2012 from University Brunei Darussalam Ebrary Books Website.

-Woo, C. W. H. (2010). Analyzing Visual Communication. Brunei Darussalam: University Brunei Darussalam.