Political sectarianism is fueled in part by misperceptions of political opponents: People commonly overestimate the support for extreme policies among members of the other party. These misperceptions inflame partisan animosity and may be used to justify extremism among one's own party. Research suggests that correcting partisan misperceptions-by informing people about the actual views of outparty members-may reduce one's own expressed support for political extremism, including partisan violence and antidemocratic actions. However, there remains a limited understanding of how the design of correction interventions drives these effects. The present study investigated how correction effects depend on different representations of outparty views communicated through data visualizations. Building on prior interventions that present the average outparty view, we consider the impact of visualizations that more fully convey the range of views among outparty members. We conducted an experiment with U.S.-based participants from Prolific (N=239 Democrats, N=244 Republicans). Participants made predictions about support for political violence and undemocratic practices among members of their political outparty. They were then presented with data from an earlier survey on the actual views of outparty members. Some participants viewed only the average response (Mean-Only condition), while other groups were shown visual representations of the range of views from 75% of the outparty (Mean+Interval condition) or the full distribution of responses (Mean+Points condition). Compared to a control group that was not informed about outparty views, we observed the strongest correction effects (i.e., lower support for political violence and undemocratic practices) among participants in the Mean-only and Mean+Points condition, while correction effects were weaker in the Mean+Interval condition. In addition, participants who observed the full distribution of out-party views (Mean+Points condition) were most accurate at later recalling the degree of support among the outparty. Our findings suggest that data visualizations can be an important tool for correcting pervasive distortions in beliefs about other groups. However, the way in which variability in outparty views is visualized can significantly shape how people interpret and respond to corrective information. Supplemental materials for this paper are available at this OSF repository.

News articles containing data visualizations play an important role in informing the public on issues ranging from public health to politics. Recent research on the persuasive appeal of data visualizations suggests that prior attitudes can be notoriously difficult to change. Inspired by an NYT article, we designed two experiments to evaluate the impact of elicitation and contrasting narratives on attitude change, recall, and engagement. We hypothesized that eliciting prior beliefs leads to more elaborative thinking that ultimately results in higher attitude change, better recall, and engagement. Our findings revealed that visual elicitation leads to higher engagement in terms of feelings of surprise. While there is an overall attitude change across all experiment conditions, we did not observe a significant effect of belief elicitation on attitude change. With regard to recall error, while participants in the draw trend elicitation exhibited significantly lower recall error than participants in the categorize trend condition, we found no significant difference in recall error when comparing elicitation conditions to no elicitation. In a follow-up study, we added contrasting narratives with the purpose of making the main visualization (communicating data on the focal issue) appear strikingly different. Compared to the results of Study 1, we found that contrasting narratives improved engagement in terms of surprise and interest but interestingly resulted in higher recall error and no significant change in attitude. We discuss the effects of elicitation and contrasting narratives in the context of topic involvement and the strengths of temporal trends encoded in the data visualization.

Data visualizations are vital to scientific communication on critical issues such as public health, climate change, and socioeconomic policy. They are often designed not just to inform, but to persuade people to make consequential decisions (e.g., to get vaccinated). Are such visualizations persuasive, especially when audiences have beliefs and attitudes that the data contradict? In this paper we examine the impact of existing attitudes (e.g., positive or negative attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccination) on changes in beliefs about statistical correlations when viewing scatterplot visualizations with different representations of statistical uncertainty. We find that strong prior attitudes are associated with smaller belief changes when presented with data that contradicts existing views, and that visual uncertainty representations may amplify this effect. Finally, even when participants’ beliefs about correlations shifted their attitudes remained unchanged, highlighting the need for further research on whether data visualizations can drive longer-term changes in views and behavior.

Images are an indispensable part of the news we consume. Highly emotional images from mainstream and misinformation sources can greatly influence our trust in the news. We present two studies on the effects of emotional facial images on users' perception of bias in news content and the credibility of sources. In study 1, we investigate the impact of repeated exposure to content with images containing positive or negative facial expressions on users’ judgements of source credibility and bias. In study 2, we focus on sources' systematic emotional portrayal of specific politicians. Our results show the presence of negative (angry) facial emotions can lead to perceptions of higher bias in content. We also find that systematic portrayal negative portrayal of different politicians leads to lower perceptions of source credibility. These results highlight how implicit visual propositions manifested by emotions in facial expressions might have a substantial effect on our trust in news.

For many households, investing for retirement is one of the most significant decisions and is fraught with uncertainty. In a classic study in behavioral economics, Benartzi and Thaler (1999) found evidence using bar charts that investors exhibit myopic loss aversion in retirement decisions: Investors overly focus on the potential for short-term losses, leading them to invest less in riskier assets and miss out on higher long-term returns. Recently, advances in uncertainty visualizations have shown improvements in decision-making under uncertainty in a variety of tasks. In this paper, we conduct a controlled and incentivized crowdsourced experiment replicating Benartzi and Thaler (1999) and extending it to measure the effect of different uncertainty representations on myopic loss aversion. Consistent with the original study, we find evidence of myopic loss aversion with bar charts and find that participants make better investment decisions with longer evaluation periods. We also find that common uncertainty representations such as interval plots and bar charts achieve the highest mean expected returns while other uncertainty visualizations lead to poorer long-term performance and strong effects on the equity premium. Qualitative feedback further suggests that different uncertainty representations lead to visual reasoning heuristics that can either mitigate or encourage a focus on potential short-term losses. We discuss implications of our results on using uncertainty visualizations for retirement decisions in practice and possible extensions for future work.

Understanding correlation judgement is important to designing effective visualizations of bivariate data. Prior work on correlation perception has not considered how factors including prior beliefs and uncertainty representation impact such judgements. The present work focuses on the impact of uncertainty communication when judging bivariate visualizations. Specifically, we model how users update their beliefs about variable relationships after seeing a scatterplot with and without uncertainty representation. To model and evaluate the belief updating, we present three studies. Study 1 focuses on a proposed "Line + Cone" visual elicitation method for capturing users' beliefs in an accurate and intuitive fashion. The findings reveal that our proposed method of belief solicitation reduces complexity and accurately captures the users' uncertainty about a range of bivariate relationships. Study 2 leverages the "Line + Cone" elicitation method to measure belief updating on the relationship between different sets of variables when seeing correlation visualization with and without uncertainty representation. We compare changes in users beliefs to the predictions of Bayesian cognitive models which provide normative benchmarks for how users should update their prior beliefs about a relationship in light of observed data. The findings from Study 2 revealed that one of the visualization conditions with uncertainty communication led to users being slightly more confident about their judgement compared to visualization without uncertainty information. Study 3 builds on findings from Study 2 and explores differences in belief update when the bivariate visualization is congruent or incongruent with users' prior belief. Our results highlight the effects of incorporating uncertainty representation, and the potential of measuring belief updating on correlation judgement with Bayesian cognitive models.