Brian J. Zikmund?Fisher|Holly O. Witteman|Andrea Fuhrel-Forbis|Nicole Exe|Valerie C. Kahn|Mark A. Dickson
Animated Graphics for Comparing Two Risks: A Cautionary Tale
University of Michigan–Ann Arbor|University of Michigan–Ann Arbor|University of Michigan–Ann Arbor|University of Michigan–Ann Arbor|University of Michigan–Ann Arbor|University of Michigan–Ann Arbor
increasing use computeradministered risk communications affords potential replace static risk graphics animations use motion cues reinforce key risk messages research use animated graphics however yielded mixed findings little research exists identify specific animations might improve risk knowledge patients decision makingto test whether viewing animated forms standard pictograph icon array risk graphics displaying risks side effects would improve peoples ability select treatment lowest risk profile compared viewing static images risksa total 4198 members demographically diverse internet panel read scenario two hypothetical treatments thyroid cancer treatment described equally effective varied side effects one option slightly better participants randomly assigned receive risk information 1 10 pictograph formats quasifactorial design compared control condition static grouped icons static scattered icon display 8 flashbased animated versions incorporated different combinations 1 building risk 1 icon time 2 scattered risk icons settle group 3 scattered risk icons shuffle either automatically user control assessed participants ability choose better treatment choice accuracy gist knowledge side effects knowledge accuracy graph evaluation ratings controlling subjective numeracy need cognitionwhen compared static groupedicon arrays animations significantly improved outcomes showed significant performance degradations however participants received animations grouped icons atrisk icons appeared 1 time performed well outcomes static groupedicon control group displays scattered icons static animated performed particularly poorly unless included settle animation allowed users view event icons groupedmany combinations animation especially scattered icons shuffle randomly appear inhibit knowledge accuracy context static pictographs group risk icons however perform well measures knowledge choice accuracy findings parallel recent evidence data communication contexts less morethat simpler focused information presentation result improved understanding decision aid designers health educators proceed caution considering use animated risk graphics compare two risks given evidencebased static risk graphics appear optimal