In an effort to keep trying to get people’s attention in an increasingly attention-deficit world, we get a lot of inquiries for links to websites promoting education programs and other affiliate websites. The latest effort is focused around “infographics,” those graphics made popular by the USA Today newspaper that combines an interesting graphical element with hard data. A well done infographic ostensibly makes data more engaging. A fantastic infographic puts data into proper perspective and gives it valuable context.
What these marketing firms send me, however, are not fantastic or even well-done. So in the interests of demonstrating that any infographic can be worse than no infographic, I’m going to critique one of the latest ones to have come across my desk. It’s about depression, one of the most common and serious mental disorders.
This is going to be fun.
Before posting, please read our blog moderation guidelines. The comments below begin with the oldest comments first. Click on the last comments page to jump to the most recent comments.
Before posting, please read our blog moderation guidelines.
Post a Comment:
Copyright © 1995-2013 Psych Central. All rights reserved.
Site last updated: 22 May 2013
|
Yep, sure there are side effects with some people some of the time with all the anti-depressants (and most other drugs)- but many depressed people can be so depressed they’d much rather have a side effect than the actual depression! I’ve had major depression on and off most of my life and when I found a drug that worked OK (not many have), I’ve usually said “Damn the side effects” because I’m so pleased to feel something like normal again. I’ve also had friends along the way who either won’t take any anti-depressants or switch quickly from one to the other after a few days of side effects. I’ve tried to convey my philosophy to them, but they don’t seem to have the motivation to “push through” the side effects and enjoy the mood improvement- and ability to live life instead of forever waiting. I’m sure advertising to doctors whether positive or negative about anti depressants has an effect on them and often I think that marketing should be taken away from drug companies and given to an independent body. This organisation could also authorise anonymous trials on grants for that purpose alone. If doctors knew there was a short list of drugs and the best range of doses, patients could decide which worked or not. After all, psychological disorders like depression are very individual and different drugs work on different people, seemingly at random. I’ve just found that 600mg of venlafaxine keeps me quite well and able to feel a good range of emotions, plus it “kickstarts” my motivation and gets me interested in things again. I’ve had 12 years of flailing around, trying to find an antidepressant that improved me enough to want to keep living. Following anyone’s advice on what was “best” did me no good at all- trying Duloxetine, Reboxetine, Aurorix, Cymbalta and others I’ve forgotten left me either numb or vaguely perked up, but never feeling happy. Prozac worked wonderfully at a high dose for about 6 years, then tailed off, leaving me to dip out of life significantly until I tried Effexor and some “booster” psych sessions. I have side effects- funny tingling effects “in my head” and sometimes elsewhere and I can’t get my blood pressure down to a healthy level so far, but life is totally different. I wouldn’t give away the drugs just to rid myself of the side effects- I’d be a total zombie & life wouldn’t be worth living.
As a professional copy editor, I can confirm that is some very sloppy work. But don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater — infographics are extremely helpful in conveying information clearly (think of the ubiquitous “men” and “women” pointing the way to bathrooms at airports around the world). The lesson here? Don’t hire ADrugRecall.com/eJustice/CMTM. If they exhibit such carelesses and lack of attention to detail in their _own_ work, imagine how they would treat a client!
You did a good research, there, with your informations that infographic can be strongly upgrated. But I also think that the problem is not the infographic itself, it´s the bad infographic. When it´s done cleverly, it can be extremely helpful and important to transmit information effectively.
Ta.
Infographics can indeed be helpful to illustrate complex information and make it more user-friendly.
However, people simply don’t know and can’t tell whether the information presented in an infographic is accurate. Especially when it has references and looks good. That’s the danger of these graphics — they’re so slick and good looking, nobody thinks to check to make sure the data is actually correct.
There’s no easy answer to this problem. The infographic I cite here was produced by a company in order to try and drive traffic for affiliate money. They didn’t care about the specific topic, only that the graphic was produced and distributed. So I guess that’s one key to look for — who produced the infographic?
Educating the public is a tall order any day of the wk., consequently, expect more infographics. As a graphics professional I see more and more information boiled down to a few simple sentences on web sites, brochures, and audio sound bites. My suggestion is to 1.FIGHT BACK with your own infographics (savvy graphics professional eager for intelligent freelance projects! …
. 2.REQUEST, badger, cajole for equal time in the media – newspapers are historically/traditionally more open to printing all sides of a story. 3.HIRE a professional graphics designer who gets your message (doesn’t have to be me. 
The first two, you’re right, they are just awful and maybe a little dangerous.
However I think you were a little harsh on the last one. Yeah it was a dumb thing to do to include 11 people instead of 10 but do you think that is actually going to alter the effect of the information?
I think people are so ignorant to mental illnesses as it is such a taboo subject, I feel someone searching for information on the subject isn’t going to get confused by a stat that says 50% when there are 6 people colourd in.
The common person is more likely to pay attention to a short snappy inforgraphic than read through pages and pages of medical splur with words people have never heard of. I think a 14 year old teenager would welcome this sort of information as it is engaging. There’s an awesome saying for this “Tell me and I forget, Show me and I remember, involve me and I understand”
I say more inforgraphics just maybe better quality. (I actually found this page trying to find a high quality infographic.)
Thanks,
You were definitely harsh on that last one. I agree, the person couldn’t count. Having ten icons instead of 11 would have solved the first two stats. For the 6.6% statistic, perhaps 2/3 of the first icon could have been shaded. But it was obviously a mistake on their part. Give them a break.
Infographics are easy to create and easy to consume, it’s also easy to corrupt the data.
We are more often than not searching for confirmation of our own beliefs (confirmation bias) when googleing around for what currently interests us. Infographics serve it to us more efficiently than anything else.
As always, look for sources of the data! did the infographic come from pubmed.gov or anxietycash.biz ?