The experimental design was altered for the second user test (as described in 3.3.3 on page 68). This reflection discusses the implications of comparing the message to the medium.
4.4.1 The Hungry Microbiome: Infographics compared to Video
The most significant difference in the video and infographic versions of The Hungry Microbiome was the exclamation of insight. Only one user was observed, and recorded, having an ‘aha’ moment while reading the infographic, at the climax of the narrative. This reaction was much more common in the video version. Users did self-report that they learned something new while reading the infographic, but there was no somatic reaction observed—the “aha” or “I see” comment, which was common when watching the video. In general, users reported that the video was more clear and helpful than the infographics, and also a more satisfying experience. When reading the infographic version, some users commented that as they didn’t have a medical background, it was difficult to follow new terms being introduced, and they may need to re-read different parts to keep up with the terminology. This was not a comment users made after watching the video.
Participants also took different keywords from the two representations of the same content. The descriptions of the information in the infographic focus on the function of butyrate, a small molecule absorbed by the body, which is mentioned during The Hungry Microbiome narrative. The users who saw the video version described the function of resistant starch, (which is then broken down by the gut microbiome to make butyrate). Some reasons for this may be that the references to resistant starch are mostly in the introduction and conclusion, which may have been easily skimmed over by readers of the infographic. Another reason may be that ‘butyrate’ is not a common word and, when written, the word itself and the meaning behind it may be seen as the novel part of the infographic, rather than the function of resistant starch. Additionally, the call to action is not as explicit in the infographic as it is in the video. The call to action may have been completely missed by some users reading the infographic version. One user made the following comparison about The Hungry Microbiome infographic, when comparing it to Alzheimer’s Enigma video:
“Very different from the infographic - the infographic had a purpose, where this is some- thing educational… [the infographic] was more about ‘you should do this… because it will prevent you from getting cancer’, whereas [Alzheimer’s Enigma says] ‘this is how your body works, and this could happen to you,’ and because they know this already, they can put more research into it and they understand it better, which is a hopeful thing.” (Experiment 2, user 3)
4.4.2 Video comparison: Alzheimer’s Enigma and The Hungry Microbiome
This response to Alzheimer’s Enigma shows an important contrast between the videos used in each ex- periment. Both videos were very well received by the users, more enthusiastically than any of the infographics, with 19 out of 20 users scoring moving visualisation 6 or higher out of 9 pleasurable.
4.4. REFLECTION 3: THE MESSAGE OR THE MEDIUM? 81
Users were able to parse the information internally without feeling like they had to concentrate, their body language was much more relaxed than when they were reading the infographics. However, the depth and scope of personal reflection was much more limited after watching Alzheimer’s Enigma, when compared to The Hungry Microbiome:
“[It] always makes me happy to see a visualisation of something invisible to the naked eye. Like learning about another Universe, but one that I have more control over and can influence.” (Experiment 1, user 2, after watching The Hungry Microbiome)
“...visualising what it would look like in my own stomach.” (Experiment 1, user 7 after watching The Hungry Microbiome)
The personal insights after watching Alzheimer’s Enigma related to family and friends, but less vividly relating the information to themselves:
“It is a subject I have a keen interest in as it affects my family as well as those of many friends.” (Experiment 2, user 7)
“The content definitely communicated its point effectively, so I felt general concern and feeling of hopelessness because of this comprehension.” (Experiment 2, user 3)
Both videos have a similar, but not identical narrative structure. The Hungry Microbiome has four parts to its narrative, described here using terms from narrative visualisation, and data videos in [3]: (see 2.3.2 on page 45)
1. Establish a scientific concept:resistant starch nourishes the gut microbiome
2. Initial scenes explain some of the science behind the concept:processes of resistant starch being broken down to fuel for the human body
3. The climax, which non-experts may find novel: this fuel directly protects the human body from colorectal cancer
4. The release/call for action: by eating foods rich in resistant starch, you can protect yourself from cancer
The objective of this video was to communicate information that will inspire action (as mentioned in 1.1 on page 15, the video was funded by a grant from Inspiring Australia). Alzheimer’s Enigma has a narrative structure which differs slightly:
1. Establish a scientific concept: An early sign of Alzheimer’s disease is the build-up of plaques around the cells in the brain
2. Initial scenes explain some of the science behind the concept: protein recycling methods in the brain cells
3. The climax, which non-experts may find novel: some parts of the protein escape recycling and build up to form plaques inside the brain
4. Instead of a call to action, the release introduces current research into the field: a blood test can detect the build-up of these plaques decades before any loss in brain function The objective of this video was to communicate information. By not giving a call to action, the users didn’t have the opportunity to respond in the same way; even though both videos had excellent production quality, similar narrative structure, and were backed by scientific research. Alzheimer’s Enigma is missing what user 4 in experiment 1 described as “a hook to engage you” that was in The Hungry
Microbiome. The same user stated that it didn’t matter that the video was not explicitly listing foods
that contain the types of starch that the video talks about, as that information it is very easy to find. This would be especially true about users who are watching the video on CSIRO’s YouTube channel. This user also pointed out that a viewer is “not going to look for the information if you are not really engaged at all.”
Production of this kind of video may require a substantial investment, so it is important that these videos have a clear objective. In order to engage users, the responses users gave suggest two additional considerations for producing NEUVis:
1. Introduce and explain information that the user would have difficulty discovering and de- ciphering for themselves. The scientific information may be very difficult for the non-expert user to access, let alone process on their own. Of course this is possible, there are many open access journals and publications, but it is a substantial investment on the behalf of the user. In order to leverage novelty, the user must be shown something that is unlikely to be well known. For example, The Hungry Microbiome poses the question “Why should I eat resistant starch?” A non-expert user may not even know to ask this question, or what resistant starch actually is. The explanation provided by the video, which answers this question, involves a lot of research and collaboration between primary researchers (the scientists) and creative practitioners (the animation team.) The same level of understanding would be difficult for a non-expert user to attain by themselves, and the video can save that time for many users. This also centralised the effort necessary to understand this information, so that the benefit can be distributed among the general population.
2. Leave the user with something they can to do, within their context, that can promote further engagement with the content. The Hungry Microbiome does not explicitly answer the obvious follow on question that the video poses to the user “if resistant starch is good for me, where do I find it?” The audience is most likely watching the video online, so the user can simply search online for foods that contain resistant starch. This task is not as complex as finding out what resistant starch is, why it is good for you, or how it works, which is addressed by the video.