Human
beings have lived in a visual reality since the dawn of time. A good
example of this are the drawings in caves from the Stone Age.
Therefore, the general trend for visuals in science, business,
marketing, advertisements, commercials, and many others in recent
years are omnipresent. However, a number ofquestions arise: how do we
perceive images and how do our brains interpret what they see? When
comparing visuals to texts – what are their strong and weak points?
What are their advantages and disadvantages? When does the receiver
get the message faster? In which case does he/she understand it
better? Are these just rhetorical questions?
It
is indisputable that text will never be able to compete with images
and vice versa. These two are different in their speed, precision,
and form,as well as the cognitive processes they use. Human cognitive
processes oscillate around images from the moment of birth. A child
understands and recognizes his/her mother's image before he/she
really understands the word “mother”. The power of graphics comes
from the way the human brain receives and transmits information,
which we call visual
perception,
and the processing of visual information, based on visual reasoning
skills. Thanks to this ability, a receiver processes and interprets
the meaning of visual information provided by eyesight.
In
the 1970s, the American psychologist Albert Mahrabian concluded that
the interpretation of a message is 7% verbal
(the words spoken – the vocabulary and grammar), 38% vocal
(this
includes voice qualities such as intonation, volume, pace, and
accent),and 55% visual
(body
language, setting and context),respectively. His conclusion was that
93% of communication is nonverbal. The brain processes itmuch faster
than text because the brain is used to processing images. People
remember 80% of what they see and only 20% of what they read.
Moreover, a team of neuroscientists at the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology (MIT) found that the brain is able to process entire
images that the human eye sees for as little as 13 milliseconds.
According to Mary Potter, part of the MIT research team, a human is
able to identify a dozen or so flashing images linked by a specific
concept in a fraction of a second. On the other hand, a team of
scientists from the University of Toronto, in their research on the
Neural
correlates of the episodic encoding of pictures and words,
proved that people are able to remember 2000 photos with an accuracy
of at least 90% over a period of several days, even with a very short
presentation time while learning. Therefore, research indicates that
we have a much better memory for visual content than written text,
which may be due to the fact that images automatically make
connections in our brains with other knowledge about the world,
i.e.which involvesmore complicated coding than in the case of words.
This does not mean, of course, that we do not understand and do not
remember the written text - however, it involves other cognitive
processes.
Another
interesting aspect of the effectiveness of visuals is presentations
which are so popular in many different areas of life, starting from
science, via business and finance, and ending with product
commercials and fairs. In 1986, a research team from the University
of Minnesota investigated how an audience is affected by presentations
with and without images. The scientists found that presentations
using visual tools were 43% more convincing than those without visual
aids. The perception of the presenter also changed – he/she was
perceived as more professional, convincing, and interesting, and as
making better use of auxiliary data. These results were confirmed by
a study commissioned by 3M Corporation. It discovered that you can be
43% more effective when using visual aids as a presenter. Similarly,
unless words, concepts, and ideas are linked to an image, they “go
in one ear, and out the other”. It happens because words are mostly
processed by our short-term
memory in
which the average man can only store, simultaneously, about seven pieces
of digital information (written numbers). Images, however, go directly
into our long-term
memory, where
they are permanently etched. Thus, on seeing the graphical
representation of data, we can remember simultaneously more numbers
and their interrelations.
A
graphical form of information can increase the attractiveness of not
only the presentation, but also of a TV advertisement, commercial or
website design. The Stanford Persuasive Technology Lab asked 2440
participants how they evaluated the credibility of a website they
were shown. Almost half (46.1%) answered that the look of the website
was the number one criterion for discerning the credibility of the
presented material.
Graphics
can do what text alone cannot. According to Michael Parkinson, a
British journalist and investigator of powerful visual communication,
graphical information quickly affects us both cognitively and
emotionally, so having the right visuals is incredibly powerful.
1) Cognitively: “Graphics
expedite and increase our level of communication. They increase
comprehension, recollection, and retention. Visual clues help us
decode text and attract attention to information or direct attention,
increasing the likelihood that the audience will remember”.
2) Emotionally: “Pictures
enhance or affect emotions and attitudes. Graphics engage our
imagination and heighten our creative thinking by stimulating other
areas of our brain (which in turn leads to a more profound and
accurate understanding of the presented material). It is no secret
that emotions influence decision-making.”
“(Emotions)
play an essential role in decision making, perception, learning, and
more … they influence the very mechanisms of rational thinking”.
(Mike Parkinson’s “The Power of Visual Communication”)
