Abstract

Visual or pictorial research papers have emerged in recent years in academic conferences as a non-written archival contribution. Dual Coding Theory teaches us that visual knowledge is distinct from written knowledge and is arguably a universal language (Dreyfuss, 1984), with the ability to communicate complex ideas with clarity, precision, and efficiency (Tufte, 2001). This study explores the reading experience differences between a visual and written research paper containing identical content from design, engineering, and business disciplines. Reading experiences were assessed using a ‘think, feel, and do’ survey, and comprehension was assessed with a quiz. Participants tracked time spent reading and how many times they revisited information. Visual papers provide an improved overall reading experience. Quiz comprehension results were mixed, showing no advantage of one modality over the other. Participants reading visual papers revisited information twice as much as those reading written papers. Designers, engineers, and businesspeople were favourably united in their visual paper reading experience ratings but were not on their written paper ratings. Keywords: Visual Papers; Pictorial Papers; Non-Written Academic Output; Design Learning; Assessing Reading Experiences

Keywords

visual papers, academic design papers, design experience, design learning, assessing reading experiences

Creative Commons License

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

Conference Track

Research Paper

Share

COinS
 
Sep 24th, 9:00 AM

Exploring the experiential reading differences between visual and written research papers

Visual or pictorial research papers have emerged in recent years in academic conferences as a non-written archival contribution. Dual Coding Theory teaches us that visual knowledge is distinct from written knowledge and is arguably a universal language (Dreyfuss, 1984), with the ability to communicate complex ideas with clarity, precision, and efficiency (Tufte, 2001). This study explores the reading experience differences between a visual and written research paper containing identical content from design, engineering, and business disciplines. Reading experiences were assessed using a ‘think, feel, and do’ survey, and comprehension was assessed with a quiz. Participants tracked time spent reading and how many times they revisited information. Visual papers provide an improved overall reading experience. Quiz comprehension results were mixed, showing no advantage of one modality over the other. Participants reading visual papers revisited information twice as much as those reading written papers. Designers, engineers, and businesspeople were favourably united in their visual paper reading experience ratings but were not on their written paper ratings. Keywords: Visual Papers; Pictorial Papers; Non-Written Academic Output; Design Learning; Assessing Reading Experiences

 

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.