Useful Chartjunk

+ The Chartjunk Debate

Ricardo Cunha Lima

The Useful Junk Study

This research was designed to test the influence of chartjunk vs. plain
(minimalist) graphs on two effects: comprehension and recall.
-

14 data visualizations were used,

one embellished and one plain.
20 participants were recruited from the university.
Each of the participants was shown all 14 charts, but only one version of each
(7 embellished and 7 plain).
- reading and descriptionparticipants viewed the charts one at a time on a
computer screen and followed the instructions of a tester who sat with them.

Questions
For each chart, participants were asked to answer the four following
questions, further assisted by supplementary prompts as needed:

Recall
participants were divided into two groups:
- 10 were tested for immediate recall
- 10 for long-term recall (two to three weeks later).
In both cases participants were asked to recall as many of the charts
as possible.
Afterwards, for each that they recalled, the tester asked them the same four
questions above and recorded what they correctly remembered. Following
this, the tester then reminded the participant about the charts that they failed
to recall and asked the four questions about those charts as well.

Holmes chart

Minimalist version

The Findings
"We found that peoples accuracy in describing the embellished charts was
no worse than for plain charts, and that their recall after a two-to-threeweek gap was significantly better.
Although we are cautious about recommending that all charts be produced
in this style, our results question some of the premises of the minimalist
approach to chart design. "

Additional findings
1.Participants saw value messages in the Holmes charts significantly more
often than in the plain charts.
2.Participants found the Holmes charts more attractive, most enjoyed
them, and found that they were easiest and fastest to remember.

Methodological Shortcomings
Inappropriate assumptions:
1. The purpose for which the charts in the test were used is typical of the
way quantitative graphs are used in the real world.
2. The embellished charts by Nigel Holmes represent extreme examples of
chartjunk.
3. The plain charts were designed in the manner that proponents of
graphical minimalism advocate.
4. A study involving 20 university students can produce trustworthy results.
5. This study identifed relevant factors and adequately controlled them.

Typical Uses of Quantitative Graphs

The embellished charts that were used in this study exhibited the following
characteristics:
1. The chart communicates an extremely simple, brief message; one that could be
stated in words as a single sentence and in fact is summed up in the charts title.
2. The chart contains a small set of quantitative values, which illustrates the
message.
3. The embellishment is tied metaphorically to the message of the chart.
4. The chart is designed by a talented graphic artist.

Typical Uses of Quantitative Graphs (according to Stephen Few)

1. Present all the data that is needed for the audience to see and understand
whats meaningful.
2. Present nothing that isnt needed.
3. Represent data accurately.
4. Represent data in a way that is easy for the eyes to perceive and the brain to
interpret.
5. Provide appropriate context for interpreting the meaning of the data.

Typical Uses of Quantitative Graphs (according to Stephen Few)

1. Present all the data that is needed for the audience to see and understand
whats meaningful.
2. Present nothing that isnt needed.
3. Represent data accurately.
4. Represent data in a way that is easy for the eyes to perceive and the brain to
interpret.
5. Provide appropriate context for interpreting the meaning of the data.

Extreme Embellishment (chart junk)

Heres an extreme example of typical chartjunk (FEW):

Well Designed Simplicity

The plain charts used in this study were in fact plain ugly.
In addition to being stripped of nonessential ink, the
plain charts ignored basic principles of design, resulting
in displays that were unnecessarily hard on the eyes.

By displaying bar outlines only (no ll color) and enclosing the chart as a whole in a
border of equal salience as the bar outlines, an uncomfortable visual effect is created.
Below is a better-designed version of the same chart:

Unconsidered and Uncontrolled Factors

- Characteristics of a representative sample of quantitative graph users
- Different purposes for which people use quantitative graphs
- Different types of chart embellishment
The study suffered from ignoring these factors, producing results that cannot be
trusted, despite the fact that they are probably true, and cannot be used to evaluate
the effects of chartjunk on most of the quantitative graphs that are used in the world.

What Really Qualifies As Chartjunk?

In Stephen Fews opinion,
- nothing that supports the charts message in a meaningful way is junk.
-

Sometimes more than minimal ink and sometimes even redundant content is
needed to communicate a charts message and drive it home.

By defining chartjunk too broadly, Tufte to some degree invited the heated
controversy that has raged ever since.

Graphical embellishments can support the effectiveness of a data visualization in

three potential ways:
1) by engaging the interest of the reader (i.e., getting them to read the content),
2) by drawing the readers attention to particular items that merit emphasis, and
3) by making the message more memorable. Embellishments only enhance
effectiveness, however, if they refrain from undermining the message by signi
cantly distracting from it or misrepresenting it.

Conclusions by Stephen Few

This study contributes to data visualization research in the following ways:
1. It reminds us that simple messages can at times be presented in a more engaging
and memorable manner through the use of properly designed embellishments.
2. It prompts us to define chartjunk more precisely. Embellishments are not always
useless or damaging.
3. It prompts us to categorize chart embellishments into various types and to test
their effects individually.
Future research can help us better understand the relative benefits of embellished vs.
unembellished graphs. Until then, and perhaps forever, the debate will continue.