IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v37y2017i8p942-954.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does Guiding Toward Task-Relevant Information Help Improve Graph Processing and Graph Comprehension of Individuals with Low or High Numeracy? An Eye-Tracker Experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Carmen Keller
  • Alex Junghans

Abstract

Background. Individuals with low numeracy have difficulties with understanding complex graphs. Combining the information-processing approach to numeracy with graph comprehension and information-reduction theories, we examined whether high numerates’ better comprehension might be explained by their closer attention to task-relevant graphical elements, from which they would expect numerical information to understand the graph. Furthermore, we investigated whether participants could be trained in improving their attention to task-relevant information and graph comprehension. Design. In an eye-tracker experiment ( N = 110) involving a sample from the general population, we presented participants with 2 hypothetical scenarios (stomach cancer, leukemia) showing survival curves for 2 treatments. In the training condition, participants received written instructions on how to read the graph. In the control condition, participants received another text. We tracked participants’ eye movements while they answered 9 knowledge questions. The sum constituted graph comprehension. We analyzed visual attention to task-relevant graphical elements by using relative fixation durations and relative fixation counts. Results. The mediation analysis revealed a significant ( P

Suggested Citation

  • Carmen Keller & Alex Junghans, 2017. "Does Guiding Toward Task-Relevant Information Help Improve Graph Processing and Graph Comprehension of Individuals with Low or High Numeracy? An Eye-Tracker Experiment," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 37(8), pages 942-954, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:37:y:2017:i:8:p:942-954
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X17713473
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X17713473
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X17713473?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:cup:judgdm:v:8:y:2013:i:6:p:700-716 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Christina Kreuzmair & Michael Siegrist & Carmen Keller, 2016. "High Numerates Count Icons and Low Numerates Process Large Areas in Pictographs: Results of an Eye‐Tracking Study," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(8), pages 1599-1614, August.
    3. repec:cup:judgdm:v:9:y:2014:i:5:p:420-432 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lyndal J. Trevena & Carissa Bonner & Yasmina Okan & Ellen Peters & Wolfgang Gaissmaier & Paul K. J. Han & Elissa Ozanne & Danielle Timmermans & Brian J. Zikmund-Fisher, 2021. "Current Challenges When Using Numbers in Patient Decision Aids: Advanced Concepts," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 41(7), pages 834-847, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Reynolds, J.P. & Pilling, M. & Marteau, T.M., 2018. "Communicating quantitative evidence of policy effectiveness and support for the policy: Three experimental studies," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 218(C), pages 1-12.
    2. Ihnji Jon & Shih‐Kai Huang & Michael K. Lindell, 2019. "Perceptions and Expected Immediate Reactions to Severe Storm Displays," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(1), pages 274-290, January.
    3. Lyndal J. Trevena & Carissa Bonner & Yasmina Okan & Ellen Peters & Wolfgang Gaissmaier & Paul K. J. Han & Elissa Ozanne & Danielle Timmermans & Brian J. Zikmund-Fisher, 2021. "Current Challenges When Using Numbers in Patient Decision Aids: Advanced Concepts," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 41(7), pages 834-847, October.
    4. Paul C. Price & Grace A. Carlock & Sarah Crouse & Mariana Vargas Arciga, 2022. "Effects of icon arrays to communicate risk in a repeated risky decision-making task," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 17(2), pages 378-399, March.
    5. Yasmina Okan & Eva Janssen & Mirta Galesic & Erika A. Waters, 2019. "Using the Short Graph Literacy Scale to Predict Precursors of Health Behavior Change," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 39(3), pages 183-195, April.
    6. repec:cup:judgdm:v:17:y:2022:i:2:p:378-399 is not listed on IDEAS

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:37:y:2017:i:8:p:942-954. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.