IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/climat/v158y2020i2d10.1007_s10584-019-02537-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Communication of IPCC visuals: IPCC authors’ views and assessments of visual complexity

Author

Listed:
  • Jordan Harold

    (University of East Anglia)

  • Irene Lorenzoni

    (University of East Anglia)

  • Thomas F. Shipley

    (Temple University)

  • Kenny R. Coventry

    (University of East Anglia)

Abstract

Scientific figures, i.e. visuals such as graphs and diagrams, are an important component of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports that support communication and policy-making. It is therefore imperative that figures are robust representations of the science and are accessible to target audiences. We interviewed IPCC authors (n = 18) to understand the development of figures in the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) Working Group 1 (WG1) Summary for Policy-Makers (SPM). Authors expressed the view that the need to maintain scientific accuracy constrained making figures more accessible, with the consequence that figures retained complexity and often required specialists to explain the figures to others. Using sort tasks with IPCC authors and with a group of non-specialists (undergraduate students; n = 38), we found that IPCC authors generally had good awareness of which figures non-specialists perceived as being most difficult to understand. Further, by evaluating the visual complexity of the AR5 WG1 SPM figures using a computational measure, we found that greater visual complexity (i.e. high quantity of information, use of multiple colours and densely packed visual elements) is associated with greater perceived comprehension difficulty. Developing and integrating computational approaches to assess figures alongside user testing could help inform how to overcome visual complexity while maintaining scientific rigour and so enhance communication of IPCC figures and scientific visuals.

Suggested Citation

  • Jordan Harold & Irene Lorenzoni & Thomas F. Shipley & Kenny R. Coventry, 2020. "Communication of IPCC visuals: IPCC authors’ views and assessments of visual complexity," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 158(2), pages 255-270, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:climat:v:158:y:2020:i:2:d:10.1007_s10584-019-02537-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s10584-019-02537-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10584-019-02537-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10584-019-02537-z?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stefano Baldassi & Nicola Megna & David C Burr, 2006. "Visual Clutter Causes High-Magnitude Errors," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(3), pages 1-1, February.
    2. Rosemarie McMahon & Michael Stauffacher & Reto Knutti, 2016. "The scientific veneer of IPCC visuals," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 138(3), pages 369-381, October.
    3. Jordan Harold & Irene Lorenzoni & Thomas F. Shipley & Kenny R. Coventry, 2016. "Cognitive and psychological science insights to improve climate change data visualization," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 6(12), pages 1080-1089, December.
    4. Valentina Bosetti & Elke Weber & Loïc Berger & David V. Budescu & Ning Liu & Massimo Tavoni, 2017. "COP21 climate negotiators’ responses to climate model forecasts," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 7(3), pages 185-190, March.
    5. Rosemarie McMahon & Michael Stauffacher & Reto Knutti, 2015. "The unseen uncertainties in climate change: reviewing comprehension of an IPCC scenario graph," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 133(2), pages 141-154, November.
    6. Richard Black, 2015. "No more summaries for wonks," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 5(4), pages 282-284, April.
    7. David V. Budescu & Han-Hui Por & Stephen B. Broomell & Michael Smithson, 2014. "The interpretation of IPCC probabilistic statements around the world," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 4(6), pages 508-512, June.
    8. Ralf Barkemeyer & Suraje Dessai & Beatriz Monge-Sanz & Barbara Gabriella Renzi & Giulio Napolitano, 2016. "Linguistic analysis of IPCC summaries for policymakers and associated coverage," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 6(3), pages 311-316, March.
    9. Chris Rapley & Kris De Meyer, 2014. "Climate science reconsidered," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 4(9), pages 745-746, September.
    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. Emma Frances Bloomfield & Chris Manktelow, 2021. "Climate communication and storytelling," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 167(3), pages 1-7, August.
    2. Rosalind Pidcock & Kate Heath & Lydia Messling & Susie Wang & Anna Pirani & Sarah Connors & Adam Corner & Christopher Shaw & Melissa Gomis, 2021. "Evaluating effective public engagement: local stories from a global network of IPCC scientists," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 168(3), pages 1-22, October.
    3. Jonathan Breckon, 2022. "Communicating and using systematic reviews—Learning from other disciplines," Campbell Systematic Reviews, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(4), December.

    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. Angela Morelli & Tom Gabriel Johansen & Rosalind Pidcock & Jordan Harold & Anna Pirani & Melissa Gomis & Irene Lorenzoni & Eamon Haughey & Kenny Coventry, 2021. "Co-designing engaging and accessible data visualisations: a case study of the IPCC reports," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 168(3), pages 1-11, October.
    2. Arjan Wardekker & Susanne Lorenz, 2019. "The visual framing of climate change impacts and adaptation in the IPCC assessment reports," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 156(1), pages 273-292, September.
    3. Michael D. Gerst & Melissa A. Kenney & Irina Feygina, 2021. "Improving the usability of climate indicator visualizations through diagnostic design principles," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 166(3), pages 1-22, June.
    4. Astrid Kause & Wändi Bruine de Bruin & Fai Fung & Andrea Taylor & Jason Lowe, 2020. "Visualizations of Projected Rainfall Change in the United Kingdom: An Interview Study about User Perceptions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-21, April.
    5. Minal Pathak & Joyashree Roy & Shaurya Patel & Shreya Some & Purvi Vyas & Nandini Das & Priyadarshi Shukla, 2021. "Communicating climate change findings from IPCC reports: insights from outreach events in India," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 168(3), pages 1-14, October.
    6. P. Marijn Poortvliet & Meredith T. Niles & Jeroen A. Veraart & Saskia E. Werners & Fiona C. Korporaal & Bob C. Mulder, 2020. "Communicating Climate Change Risk: A Content Analysis of IPCC’s Summary for Policymakers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-14, June.
    7. Melissa A. Kenney & Anthony C. Janetos, 2020. "National indicators of climate changes, impacts, and vulnerability," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 163(4), pages 1695-1704, December.
    8. Sarah L. Connors & Maike Nicolai & Sophie Berger & Rosalind Pidcock & Melissa Walsh & Nigel Hawtin, 2022. "Co-developing the IPCC frequently asked questions as an effective science communication tool," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 171(1), pages 1-13, March.
    9. Marta Terrado & Luz Calvo & Isadora Christel, 2022. "Towards more effective visualisations in climate services: good practices and recommendations," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 172(1), pages 1-26, May.
    10. Joseph Daron & Susanne Lorenz & Andrea Taylor & Suraje Dessai, 2021. "Communicating future climate projections of precipitation change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 166(1), pages 1-20, May.
    11. Cameron Brick & Alexandra L. J. Freeman & Steven Wooding & William J. Skylark & Theresa M. Marteau & David J. Spiegelhalter, 2018. "Winners and losers: communicating the potential impacts of policies," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 4(1), pages 1-13, December.
    12. Wändi Bruine de Bruin & Andrew Dugan, 2022. "On the differential correlates of climate change concerns and severe weather concerns: evidence from the World Risk Poll," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 171(3), pages 1-24, April.
    13. David R. Mandel & Daniel Irwin, 2021. "Tracking accuracy of strategic intelligence forecasts: Findings from a long‐term Canadian study," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 3(3-4), September.
    14. Leopold Zizlsperger & Thomas Sauvigny & Thomas Haarmeier, 2012. "Selective Attention Increases Choice Certainty in Human Decision Making," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(7), pages 1-9, July.
    15. P A Hancock & William G Volante, 2020. "Quantifying the qualities of language," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(5), pages 1-27, May.
    16. Nikas, A. & Gambhir, A. & Trutnevyte, E. & Koasidis, K. & Lund, H. & Thellufsen, J.Z. & Mayer, D. & Zachmann, G. & Miguel, L.J. & Ferreras-Alonso, N. & Sognnaes, I. & Peters, G.P. & Colombo, E. & Howe, 2021. "Perspective of comprehensive and comprehensible multi-model energy and climate science in Europe," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 215(PA).
    17. repec:cup:judgdm:v:14:y:2019:i:6:p:683-695 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Evelina Trutnevyte & Céline Guivarch & Robert Lempert & Neil Strachan, 2016. "Reinvigorating the scenario technique to expand uncertainty consideration," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 135(3), pages 373-379, April.
    19. Jonathan Lynn & Nina Peeva, 2021. "Communications in the IPCC’s Sixth Assessment Report cycle," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 169(1), pages 1-10, November.
    20. Shinichiro Asayama, 2021. "Threshold, budget and deadline: beyond the discourse of climate scarcity and control," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 167(3), pages 1-16, August.
    21. Richard A. Rosen, 2016. "IS THE IPCC’s 5TH ASSESSMENT A DENIER OF POSSIBLE MACROECONOMIC BENEFITS FROM MITIGATING CLIMATE CHANGE?," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 7(01), pages 1-30, February.

    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:spr:climat:v:158:y:2020:i:2:d:10.1007_s10584-019-02537-z. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.