Graphics accompanying online news articles were manipulated between static and dynamic formats. Eye gaze, perception, and memory data were collected as was participants’ arithmetic aptitude (AA). Results suggest that although dynamic graphics are negatively evaluated, high arithmetic aptitude participants attend and recall dynamic graphics more so than those with lower AA who are drawn to and recall better static visuals. Memory and attention to graphics detracted from memory and attention to story text and vice versa.
BegleyS. (2008, September 22). Heard any good stories lately?Newsweek, p. 42.
2.
BergenL.GrimesT.PotterD. (2005). How attention partitions itself during simultaneous message presentations. Human Communication Research, 31, 311–336.
3.
BlakeC.DaschmannG. (2008, August). Experts and base-rates, laymen and single case information: Can statistical knowledge prevent exemplification effects?Paper presented at the annual conference of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Chicago.
4.
BryantJ.ZillmannD. (1984). Using television to alleviate boredom and stress: Selective exposure as a function of induced excitational states. Journal of Broadcasting, 28, 1–20.
5.
BucherH.-J.SchumacherP. (2006). The relevance of attention for selecting news content. An eye-tracking study of attention patterns in the reception of print and online media. Communications, 31, 347–368.
6.
BucyE. P.NewhagenJ. E. (2004). Media access: Social and psychological dimensions of new technology use. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
CallisonC.GibsonR.ZillmannD. (2012). Human face in news important but base-rate data inform more. Newspaper Research Journal, 33, 54–67.
9.
CallisonC.GibsonR.ZillmannD. (2013). Effects of differences in numeric ability on the perception of adversity risk to others and self. Journal of Media Psychology, 2, 95–104.
10.
ChoC.CheonH.J. (2004) Why do people avoid advertising on the internet?Journal of Advertising, 33, 89–97.
11.
CumminsR. G.TirumalaL. N.Mulieri-LellisJ. (2011). Viewer attention to ESPN’s mosaic screen: An eye-tracking investigation. Journal of Sports Media, 6, 23–54.
12.
DavidP. (1998). News concreteness and visual-verbal association: Do news pictures narrow the recall gap between concrete and abstract news?Human Communication Research, 25, 180–201.
13.
DayR.-F.ShyiG. C.-W.WangJ.-C. (2006). The effect of flash banners on multiattribute decision making: Distractor or source of arousal?Psychology & Marketing, 23, 369–382.
14.
DengL.PooleM. S. (2010). Affect in web interfaces: A study of the impacts of web page visual complexity and order. MIS Quarterly, 34, 711–730.
15.
DiaperD.WaelendP. (2000). World wide web working whilst ignoring graphics: Good news for web page designers. Interacting with Computers, 13, 163–181.
DrèzeX.HussherrF-X. (2003). Internet advertising: Is anybody watching?Journal of Interactive Marketing, 17, 8–23.
18.
DuchowskiA. T. (2003). Eye tracking methodology: Theory and practice. Berlin, Germany: Springer.
19.
GibsonR.CallisonC.ZillmannD. (2011). Quantitative literacy and affective reactivity in processing statistical information and case histories in the news. Media Psychology, 14, 96–120.
20.
GriffinJ. L.StevensonR. L. (1994a). The effectiveness of ‘how graphics’ and text in presenting the news. Visual Communication Quarterly, 1, 10–11, 16.
21.
GriffinJ. L.StevensonR. L. (1994b). The effectiveness of locator maps in increasing reader understanding of the geography of foreign news. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 71, 937–946.
22.
GriffinJ. L.StevensonR. L. (1996). The influence of statistical graphics on newspaper reader recall. Visual Communication Quarterly, 3, 9–11.
23.
HaL.McCannK. (2008). An integrated model of advertising clutter in offline and online media. International Journal of Advertising, 27, 569–592.
HervetG.GuèrardK.TremblayS.ChtourouS. (2010). Is banner blindness genuine? Eye tracking internet text advertising. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25, 708–716.
27.
HofflerT. N.LeutnerD. (2007). Instructional animation versus static pictures: A meta-analysis. Learning and Instruction, 17, 722–738.
28.
HongW.ThongJ. Y. L.TamK. T. (2004). Does animation attract online users’ attention? The effects of flash on information search performance and perceptions. Information Systems Research, 15, 60–86.
29.
IsaacowitzD. M.TonerK.GorenD.WilsonH. R. (2008). Looking while unhappy: Mood-congruent gaze in young adults, positive gaze in older adults. Psychological Science, 19, 848–853.
30.
IsaacowitzD. M.TonerK.NeupertS. D. (2009). Use of gaze for real-time mood regulation: Effects of age and attentional functioning. Psychology and Aging, 24, 989–994.
31.
JacobR. J. K.KarnK. S. (2003). Eye tracking in human-computer interaction and usability research: Ready to deliver the promises. In HyönäJ.RadachR.DeubelH. (Eds.), The mind’s eye: Cognitive and applied aspects of eye movement research (pp. 573–605). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Elsevier.
32.
JosephsonS. (2000). Eye tracking methodology and the Internet. In SmithK. L.MoriartyS.BarbatsisG.KenneyK. (Eds.), Handbook of visual communication: Theory, methods, and media (pp. 63–80). Mahwah, NJ: Lawerence Erlbaum.
33.
JosephsonS.HolmesM. E. (2008). Eye monitoring studies on TV news and the web converge: A tale of two screens. In HamoudR. I. (Ed.), Passive eye monitoring: Algorithms, applications, and experiments (pp. 387–420). Berlin, Germany: Springer.
34.
KallenbachJ.NärhiS.OittinenP. (2007). Effects of extra information on TV viewers’ visual attention, message processing ability, and cognitive workload. ACM Computers in Entertainment, 5, 4, 1–13.
35.
KimG.LuiC. (2010). The impacts of blink on graphical information processing. International Journal of Information Processing and Management, 1, 124–132.
36.
KirkorianH. L.AndersonD. R.KeenR. (2012). Age differences in online processing of video: An eye movement study. Child Development, 83, 497–507.
37.
LangA. (2000). The information processing of mediated messages: A framework for communication research. Journal of Communication, 50, 46–70.
38.
LangA.BorseJ.WiseK.DavidP. (2002). Captured by the World Wide Web: Orienting to structural and content features of computer-presented information. Communication Research, 29, 215–245.
39.
LangA.PotterD.GrabeM. E. (2003). Making news memorable: Applying theory to the production of local television news. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 47, 113–123.
LazarsfeldP. F.BerelsonB.GaudetH. (1944). The people’s choice. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
42.
LesterP. M. (1995). Visual communication: Images with messages, Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
43.
LiP.SanthanamR.CarswellC. M. (2009). Effects of animations in learning: A cognitive fit perspective. Decisions Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 7, 377–410.
44.
MaierS. R. (2002). Numbers in the news: A mathematics audit of a daily newspaper. Journalism Studies, 3, 507–519.
45.
MayerR. E.HeiserJ.LonnS. (2001). Cognitive constraint on multimedia learning: When presenting more materials results in less understanding. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 187–198.
46.
MayerR. E.MorenoR. (2002). Animation as an aid to multimedia learning. Educational Psychology Review, 14, 87–99.
47.
PasternackS.UttS. H. (1990). Reader use and understanding of newspaper infographics. Newspaper Research Journal, 11, 28–41.
48.
PerseE. M. (1996). Sensation seeking and the use of television for arousal. Communication Reports, 9, 37–48.
Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism. (2013). The state of the news media 2013. Retrieved fromhttp://stateofthemedia.org/
51.
PooleA.BallL. J. (2006). Eye tracking in HCI and usability research. In GhaouiC. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of human computer interaction (pp. 211–219). Hershey, PA: Idea Group Reference.
52.
RendgenS.WiedemannJ., eds. (2012). Information graphics. Cologne, Germany: Taschen
53.
ReynaV. F.NelsonW. L.HanP. H.DieckmannN. F. (2009). How numeracy influences risk comprehension and medical decision making. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 943–973.
RuppH. A.WallenK. (2007). Sex differences in viewing sexual stimuli: An eye-tracking study in men and women. Hormones and Behavior, 51, 524–533.
56.
SundarS. S. (2000). Multimedia effects on processing and perception of online news: A study of picture, audio, and video downloads. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 77, 480–499.
57.
SundarS. S.KalyanaramanS. (2004). Arousal, memory, and impression-formation effects of animation speed in web advertising. Journal of Advertising, 33, 7–17.
58.
SzaboM.PoohkayB. (1996). An experimental study of animation, mathematics achievement, and attitude toward computer-assisted instruction. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 28, 390–402.
59.
TuchA. N.Bargas-AvilaJ. A.OpwisK.WilhelmF. H. (2009). Visual complexity of websites: Effects on users’ experience, physiology, performance, and memory. Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 67, 703–715.
60.
UttS. A.PasternackS. (1993). Infographics today: Using qualitative devices to display quantitative information. Newspaper Research Journal, 14, 146–157.
61.
UttS. A.PasternackS. (2003). Front page design: Some trends continue. Newspaper Research Journal, 24, 48–61.
62.
van SchaikP.LingJ. (2006). The effects of graphical display and screen ratio on information retrieval in web pages. Computers in Human Behavior, 22, 870–884.
63.
WardD. B. (1992). The effectiveness of sidebar graphics. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 69, 318–328.
64.
YarbusA. L. (1967). Eye movements and vision (Trans. HaighB.). New York, NY: Plenum Press.
65.
YooC. Y.KimK. (2005). Processing of animation in online banner advertising: The roles of cognitive and emotional responses. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 19, 18–33.
66.
YooC. Y.KimK.StoutP. A. (2004). Assessing the effects of animation in online banner advertising: Hierarchy of effects model. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 4, 49–60.
67.
ZhangP. (2000). The effects of animation on information seeking performance on the world wide web: Securing attention or interfering with primary tasks?Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 1, 1–28.
68.
ZillmannD. (1999). Exemplification theory: Judging the whole by some of its parts. Media Psychology, 1, 69–94.
69.
ZillmannD. (2002). Exemplification theory of media influence. In BryantJ.ZillmannD. (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 19–41). Mahwah, NJ: Lawerence Erlbaum.
70.
ZillmannD.CallisonC.GibsonR. (2009). Quantitative media literacy: Individual differences in dealing with numbers in the news. Media Psychology, 12, 394–416.
