This article shows that animated display of time-varying data (e.g., stock or commodity prices) enhances risk judgments. We outline a process whereby animated display enhances the visual salience of transitions in a trajectory (i.e., successive changes in data values), which leads to transitions being utilized more to form cognitive inferences about risk. In turn, this leads to inflated risk judgments. The studies reported in this article provide converging evidence via eye tracking (Study 1), serial mediation analyses (Studies 2 and 3), and experimental manipulations of transition salience (graph type; Study 3) and utilization of transitions (global trend; Study 4 and investment goals; Study 5) and, in the process, outline boundary conditions. The studies also demonstrate the effect of animated display on consequential investment decisions and behavior. This article adds to the literature on salience effects by disambiguating the role of inference making in how salience of stimuli causes biases in judgments. Broader implications for visual information processing, data visualization, financial decision making, and public policy are discussed.
BenbasatIzakDexterA.S. (1985), “An Experimental Evaluation of Graphical and Color-Enhanced Information Presentation,” Management Science, 31 (11), 1348–64.
2.
BotnerKeith A.MishraArulMishraHimanshu (2020), “The Influence of the Phonetic Elements of a Name on Risk Assessment,” Journal of Consumer Research, 47 (1), 128–45.
3.
BradleyMargaret M.MiccoliLauraEscrigMiguel A.LangPeter J. (2008), “The Pupil as a Measure of Emotional Arousal and Autonomic Activation,” Psychophysiology, 45 (4), 602–07.
4.
CarpenterPatricia A.ShahPriti (1998), “A Model of the Perceptual and Conceptual Processes in Graph Comprehension,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 4 (2), 75–100.
5.
ChuaHannah FayeYatesJ. FrankShahPriti (2006), “Risk Avoidance: Graphs Versus Numbers,” Memory and Cognition, 34 (2), 399–410.
6.
CianLucaKrishnaAradhnaElderRyan S. (2015), “A Sign of Things to Come: Behavioral Change Through Dynamic Iconography,” Journal of Consumer Research, 41 (6), 1426–46.
7.
ClevelandWilliam S. (1993), “A Model for Studying Display Methods of Statistical Graphics,” Journal of Computational and Statistical Graphics, 2 (4), 323–64.
8.
DuclosRod (2015), “The Psychology of Investment Behavior: (De)biasing Financial Decision-Making One Graph at a Time,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 25 (2), 317–25.
9.
DuxburyDarrenSummersBarbara (2018), “On Perceptions of Financial Volatility in Price Sequences,” The European Journal of Finance, 24 (7–8), 521–43.
10.
EraslanSukruYesiladaYelizHarperSimon (2015), “Eye Tracking Scanpath Analysis Techniques on Web Pages: A Survey, Evaluation and Comparison,” Journal of Eye Movement Research, 9 (1), 1–19.
11.
FisherDanyel (2010), “Animation for Visualization: Opportunities and Drawbacks,” in Beautiful Visualization: Looking at Data Through the Eyes of Experts, SteeleJulieIliinskyNoah, eds. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly, 329–51.
12.
ForehandMark R.DeshpandéRohitReedAmericusII (2002), “Identity Salience and the Influence of Differential Activation of the Social Self-Schema on Advertising Response,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 87 (6), 1086–99.
13.
GoldsteinDaniel G.SuriSiddharthPreston McAfeeR.Ekstrand-AbuegMatthewDiazFernando (2014), “The Economic and Cognitive Costs of Annoying Display Advertisements,” Journal of Marketing Research, 51 (6), 742–52.
14.
HanPaul K.J.KleinWilliam M.P.KillamBillLehmanTomMassettHollyFreedmanAndrew N. (2012), “Representing Randomness in the Communication of Individualized Cancer Risk Estimates: Effects on Cancer Risk Perceptions, Worry, and Subjective Uncertainty About Risk,” Patient Education and Counseling, 86 (1), 106–13.
15.
HayesAndrew F. (2018), Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach, 2nd ed. New York: Guilford.
16.
HeerJeffreyRobertsonGeorge (2007), “Animated Transitions in Statistical Data Graphics,” Visualization and Computer Graphics, IEEE Transactions, 13 (6), 1240–47.
17.
HegartyMaryCanhamMatt S.FabrikantSara I. (2010), “Thinking About the Weather: How Display Salience and Knowledge Affect Performance in a Graphic Inference Task,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36 (1), 37–53.
18.
HenryGary T. (1995), Graphing Data: Techniques for Display and Analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
19.
HoffmannArvid O.I.PostThomasPenningsJoost M.E. (2015), “How Investor Perceptions Drive Actual Trading and Risk-Taking Behavior,” Journal of Behavioral Finance, 16 (1), 94–103.
20.
HuberJürgenPalanStefanZeisbergerStefan (2019), “Does Investor Risk Perception Drive Asset Prices in Markets? Experimental Evidence,” Journal of Banking and Finance, 108, 105635.
21.
HutchinsonJ. WesleyAlbaJoseph W.EisensteinEric M. (2010), “Heuristics and Biases in Data-Based Decision Making: Effects of Experience, Training, and Graphical Data Displays,” Journal of Marketing Research, 47 (4) 627–42.
22.
JarvenpaaSirkka L. (1990), “Graphic Displays in Decision Making—the Visual Salience Effect,” Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 3 (4), 247–62.
23.
KahnemanDanielTverskyAmos (1979), “Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk,” Econometrica, 47 (2), 263–92.
KosslynStephen M. (1994), Elements of Graph Design. New York: W.H. Freeman.
26.
LurieNicholas H.MasonCharlotte H. (2007), “Visual Representation: Implications for Decision Making,” Journal of Marketing, 71 (1), 160–77.
27.
LusardiAnnamariaMitchellOlivia S. (2007), “Financial Literacy and Retirement Preparedness: Evidence and Implications for Financial Education,” Business Economics, 42 (1), 35–44.
28.
ManoHaim (1994), “Risk-Taking, Framing Effects, and Affect,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 57 (1), 38–58.
29.
Market Reports World (2018), “Global Data Visualization Market—Segmented by Organizational Department, Delivery Mode, Industry Vertical (BFSI, IT & Telecommunication, Retail/E-Commerce, Education, Manufacturing, Government) and Region—Growth, Trends and Forecasts (2018–2023),” Market Reports World (February 8).
30.
McArthurLeslie ZebrowitzGinsbergElise (1981), “Causal Attribution to Salient Stimuli: An Investigation of Visual Fixation Mediators,” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 7 (4), 547–53.
31.
NavonDavid (1977), “Forest Before Trees: The Precedence of Global Features in Visual Perception,” Cognitive Psychology, 9 (3), 353–83.
32.
NenkovGergana Y.Jeffrey InmanJ.HullandJohn (2008), “Considering the Future: The Conceptualization and Measurement of Elaboration on Potential Outcomes,” Journal of Consumer Research, 35 (1), 126–41.
33.
NenkovGergana Y.Jeffrey InmanJ.HullandJohnMorrinMaureen (2009), “The Impact of Outcome Elaboration on Susceptibility to Contextual and Presentation Biases,” Journal of Marketing Research, 46 (6), 764–76.
34.
OzimecAna-MarijaNatterMartinReuttererThomas (2010), “Geographical Information Systems-Based Marketing Decisions: Effects of Alternative Visualizations on Decision Quality,” Journal of Marketing, 74 (6), 94–110.
35.
PettDavid (2014), “Why Retail Investors Almost Always Get Burned,” Financial Post (May 9).
36.
PincusSteveKalmanRudolf E. (2004), “Irregularity, Volatility, Risk, and Financial Market Time Series,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 101 (38), 13709–14.
37.
RaghubirPriyaDasSanjiv R. (1999), “The Psychology of Financial Decision-Making: A Case for Theory Driven Experimental Enquiry,” Financial Analysts Journal, 55 (6), 56–79.
38.
RaghubirPriyaDasSanjiv R. (2010), “The Long and Short of It: Why Are Stocks with Shorter Runs Preferred?” Journal of Consumer Research, 36 (6), 964–82.
39.
RobertsonGeorgeFernandezRolandFisherDanyelLeeBongshinStaskoJohn (2008), “Effectiveness of Animation in Trend Visualization,” Visualization and Computer Graphics, IEEE Transactions, 14 (6), 1325–32.
40.
RoggeveenAnne L.GrewalDhruvTownsendClaudiaKrishnanR. (2015), “The Impact of Dynamic Presentation Format on Consumer Preferences for Hedonic Products and Services,” Journal of Marketing, 79 (6), 34–49.
41.
Securities and Exchange Commission (2018), “17 CFR Parts 240, 249, 275 and 279—Amendments to Form ADV; Required Disclosures in Retail Communications and Restrictions on the Use of Certain Names or Titles,” 83Federal Register90, 21416–571.
42.
SundarS. ShyamKalyanaramanSriram (2004), “Arousal, Memory, and Impression-Formation Effects of Animation Speed in Web Advertising,” Journal of Advertising, 33 (1), 7–17.
43.
TaylorShelley E.FiskeSusan T. (1978), “Salience, Attention, and Attribution: Top of the Head Phenomena,” Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 11, 249–88.
44.
TaylorShelley E.ThompsonSuzanne C. (1982). “Stalking the Elusive Vividness Effect,” Psychological Review, 89 (2), 155–81.
TverskyAmos (1977) “Features of Similarity,” Psychological Review, 84 (4), 327–52.
47.
WallgrenAndersWallgrenBrittPerssonRolfJornerUlfHaalandJan-Aage (1996), Graphing Statistics and Data: Creating Better Charts. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
48.
ZacksJeffTverskyBarbara (1999), “Bars and Lines: A Study of Graphic Communication,” Memory and Cognition, 27 (6), 1073–79.
49.
ZhouRongrongPhamMichel Tuan (2004), “Promotion and Prevention Across Mental Accounts: When Financial Products Dictate Consumers’ Investment Goals,” Journal of Consumer Research, 31 (1), 125–35.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
