research-article

Open access

News Informatics: Engaging Individuals with Data-Rich News Content through Interactivity in Source, Medium, and Message

Authors:

S. Shyam Sundar,

Saraswathi Bellur,

Hyang-Sook KimAuthors Info & Claims

CHI '22: Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

Article No.: 317, Pages 1 - 17

https://doi.org/10.1145/3491102.3502207

Published: 29 April 2022 Publication History

All formats PDF

Abstract

This paper introduces the concept of “news informatics” to refer to journalistic presentation of big data in online sites. For users to be engaged with such data-driven public information, it is important to incorporate interactive tools so that each person can extract personally relevant information. Drawing upon a communication model of interactivity, we designed a data-rich site with three different types of interactive features—namely, modality interactivity, message interactivity, and source interactivity—and empirically tested their relative and combined effects on user engagement and user experience with a 2 (modality) × 3 (source) × 2 (message) field experiment (N =166). Findings shed light on how interface designers, online news editors and journalists can maximize user engagement with data-rich news content. Certain interactivity combinations are found to be better than others, with a structural equation model (SEM) revealing the underlying theoretical mechanisms and providing implications for the design of news informatics.

References

[1]

Ritu Agarwal and Elena Karahanna. 2000. Time flies when you're having fun: Cognitive absorption and beliefs about information technology usage. MIS Quarterly (2000), 665-694.

Digital Library

[2]

Stephanie Alice Baker, Matthew Wade and Michael James Walsh. 2020. The challenges of responding to misinformation during a pandemic: content moderation and the limitations of the concept of harm. Media International Australia, 177(1), 103-107. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1329878X20951301

[3]

Suzanne Bakken. 2001. An informatics infrastructure is essential for evidence-based practice., Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 8 (2001), 199-201.

[4]

Louise Barkhuus and Anind Dey. 2003. Is context-aware computing taking control away from the user? Three levels of interactivity examined. In Proceedings of the UbiComp 2003: Ubiquitous Computing. Springer-Berlin Heidelberg, 149-156.

[5]

BBC News. 2013. In graphics: Eurozone's crisis. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.com/news/business-13359367.

[6]

Saraswathi Bellur, and S. Shyam Sundar. 2016. Talking health with a machine: How does message interactivity affect attitudes and cognitions? Human Communication Research, 43(1), 25–53.

[7]

Jeremy Boy, Louis Eveillard, Françoise Detienne and Jean-Daniel Fekete. 2015. Suggested interactivity: Seeking perceived affordances for information visualization. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 22(1), 639-648.

Digital Library

[8]

Axel Brun. 2010. From reader to writer: Citizen journalism as news produsage. In International Handbook of Internet Research, Jeremy Hunsinger, Lisbeth Klastrup and Matthew M. Allen (Eds.), Springer, Dordrecht, 119-133.

[9]

Erik P. Bucy. 2004. Interactivity in society: Locating an elusive concept. The Information Society, 20, 5 (2004), 373-383.

[10]

Judee K Burgoon, Joseph A. Bonito, Artemio Ramirez, Norah E. Dunbar, Karadeen Kam, and Jenna Fischer. 2002. Testing the interactivity principle: Effects of mediation, propinquity, and verbal and nonverbal modalities in interpersonal interaction. Journal of Communication, 52, 3 (2002), 657–677.

[11]

Sarah Campbell and Dietmar Offenhuber. 2019. Feeling numbers: The emotional impact of proximity techniques in visualization. Information Design Journal, 25(1), 71-86. https://doi.org/10.1075/idj.25.1.06cam

[12]

Stuart K. Card, Jock D. Mackinlay, and Ben Shneiderman. 1999. Readings in Information Visualization: Using Vision to Think. Morgan Kaufmann.

[13]

Justine Cassell, Obed E. Torres, and Scott Prevost. 1999. Turn taking vs. discourse structure: How best to model multimodal conversation. In Machine Conversations, Yorick Wilks (Ed.), The Hague, Kluwer, 143-154.

[14]

Shan Carter, Amanda Cox, and Kevin Quealy. 2009, The jobless rate for people like you. The New York Times. (November 6 2009). Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2009/11/06/business/economy/unemployment-lines.html

[15]

Chung Joo Chung, Yoonjae Nam, and Michael A. Stefanone. 2012. Exploring online news credibility: The relative influence of traditional and technological factors. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 17, 2 (2012): 171-186.

Digital Library

[16]

Matteo Cinelli, Walter Quattrociocchi, Alessandro Galeazzi, Carlo Michele Valensise, Emanuele Brugnoli, Ana Lucia Schmidt, Paola Zola, Fabiana Zollo, and Antonio Scala. 2020. The COVID-19 social media infodemic. Scientific Reports, 10(1), 1-10.

[17]

Régis Clouard., Arnaud Renouf, and Marinette Revenu. 2011. Human-computer interaction for the generation of image processing applications. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 69, 4 (2011), 201-219.

Digital Library

[18]

Tynan DeBold and Dov Friedman. 2015. Battling infectious diseases in the 20th century: The impact of vaccines. Retrieved from http://graphics.wsj.com/infectious-diseases-and-vaccines/.

[19]

Nicholas Diakopoulos, Mor Naaman and Funda Kivran-Swaine. 2010. Diamonds in the rough: Social media visual analytics for journalistic inquiry. In 2010 IEEE Symposium on Visual Analytics Science and Technology, 115-122. IEEE.

[20]

David Domingo, Thorsten Quandt, Ari Heinonen, Steve Paulussen, Jane B. Singer, and Marina Vujnovic. 2008. Participatory journalism practices in the media and beyond: An international comparative study of initiatives in online newspapers. Journalism Practice, 2(3), 326-342.

[21]

Michael Fourman. 2002. Informatics. In International Encyclopedia of Information and Library Science, John Feathers and Paul Sturges (Eds.). Routledge.

[22]

Nikolaus Franke, Martin Schreier, and Ulrike Kaiser. 2010. The “I designed it myself” effect in mass customization. Management Science, 56(1), 125-140.

Digital Library

[23]

Nigel Ford. 2008. Educational informatics. Annual Review of Information Science, 42(1), 497-544.

[24]

Eun Go, and Denise Sevick Bortree. 2017. What and how to communicate CSR? The role of CSR fit, modality interactivity, and message interactivity on social networking sites. Journal of Promotion Management, 23(5), 727–747.

[25]

Luke Goode. 2009. Social news, citizen journalism and democracy. New Media & Society, 11(8), 1287-1305.

[26]

Frédéric Guay, Robert J. Vallerand, and Céline Blanchard. 2000. On the assessment of situational intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: The Situational Motivation Scale (SIMS). Motivation and Emotion, 24(3), 175-213.

[27]

Rom Harré. 2002. Cognitive Science: A Philosophical Introduction. Sage, London, UK.

[28]

Alexander Benjamin Howard. 2014. The Art and Science of Data-Driven Journalism. New York: Tow Center for Digital Journalism. http://towcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/ Tow-Center-Data-Driven-Journalism.pdf.

[29]

Jessica Hullman and Nicholas Diakopoulos. 2011. Visualization rhetoric: Framing effects in narrative visualization. Visualization and Computer Graphics, IEEE Transactions on, 17(12), 2231-2240.

Digital Library

[30]

Iddo Gal. 2002. Adults' statistical literacy: Meanings, components, responsibilities. International Statistical Review, 70(1), 1-25.

[31]

Robert J. K. Jacob. 1994. New human–computer interaction techniques. In Human–machine communication for educational systems design, Maddy D. Brouwer-Janse and Thomas L. Harrington (Eds.), Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany, 131–138.

[32]

Zhenhui Jiang, Jason Chan, Bernard CY Tan, and Wei Siong Chua. 2010. Effects of interactivity on Website involvement and purchase intention. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 11(1), 34-59.

[33]

Joakim Karlsen and Eirik Stavelin. 2013. Computational journalism in Norwegian newsrooms. Journalism Practice, 23(1), 1–15.

[34]

Soyoung Kim. 2011. Web-interactivity dimension and shopping experiential value. Journal of Internet Business, 9(1), 1-25.

[35]

Youjeong Kim and S. Shyam Sundar. 2012. Anthropomorphism of computers: Is it mindful or mindless? Computer in Human Behavior, 28(1), 241-250, 241-250.

Digital Library

[36]

Spiro Kiousis. 2002. Interactivity: A concept explication. New Media & Society, 4(3), 355-383.

[37]

Sang Hee Kweon, Eun Joung Cho, and Eun Mee Kim. 2008. Interactivity dimension: Media, content, and user perception. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Digital Interactive Media in Entertainment and Arts. Athens, Greece. 265-272.

Digital Library

[38]

Chien-Yu Lin, Fong-Gong Wu, Te-Hsiung Chen, Yan-Jin Wu, Kenendy Huang, Chia-Pei Liu, and Shu-Ying Chou. 2011. Using interface design with low-cost interactive whiteboard technology to enhance learning for children. Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction: Applications and Services, 6768, 558-566.

[39]

Yuping Liu and L. J. Shrum. 2002. What is interactivity and is it always such a good thing? Implications of definition, person, and situation for the influence of interactivity on advertising effectiveness. Journal of Advertising, 31(4), 53–64.

[40]

Sampada S. Marathe and S. Shyam Sundar. 2011. What drives customization? Control or identity? In Proceedings of the 2011 Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’11), 781-790. ACM. New York, NY.

Digital Library

[41]

Sally J. McMillan and Jang-Sun Hwang. 2002. Measures of perceived interactivity: An exploration of the role of direction, user control, and time in shaping perceptions of interactivity. Journal of Advertising, 31(3), 29-42.

[42]

Katina Michael, K. 2017. Bots trending now: Disinformation and calculated manipulation of the masses. IEEE Technology and Society Magazine, 36(2), 6-11.

[43]

Donald A. Norman and Stephen W. Draper. 1986. User Centered System Design: New Perspectives on Human-Computer Interaction. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.

Digital Library

[44]

Jeeyun Oh, Angel Hsing-Chi Hwang and Hayoung Sally Lim. 2021. How interactive data visualization and users’ BMI (Body Mass Index) influence obesity prevention intentions: The mediating effect of cognitive absorption. Health Communication, 36(13), 1709-1718. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2020.1791376

[45]

Jeeyun Oh, Jisoo Ahn, J. and Hayoung Sally Lim. 2019. Interactivity as a double-edged sword: Parsing out the effects of modality interactivity on anti-smoking message processing and persuasion. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 96(4), 1099-1119. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699019835911

[46]

Jeeyun Oh and S. Shyam Sundar. 2020. What happens when you click and drag: Unpacking the relationship between on-screen interaction and user engagement with an anti-smoking website. Health Communication, 35(3), 269-280. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2018.1560578

[47]

Jeeyun Oh, and S. Shyam Sundar. 2015. How does interactivity persuade? An experimental test of interactivity on cognitive absorption, elaboration, and attitudes. Journal of Communication, 65(2), 213–236.

[48]

Ellen Peters, Judith Hibbard, Paul Slovic and Nathan Dieckmann. 2007. Numeracy skill and the communication, comprehension, and use of risk-benefit information. Health Affairs 26, 3 (2007), 741-748.

[49]

Richard E. Petty and John T. Cacioppo. 1981. Issue involvement as a moderator of the effects on attitude of advertising content and context. Advances in Consumer Research, 8(1), 20-24.

[50]

Sheizaf Rafaeli. 1988. Interactivity: From new media to communication. In Advancing communication science: Merging mass and interpersonal processes, Robert P. Hawkins, John M. Wiemann and Suzanne Pingree (Eds.), Sage, Newbury Park, 110-134.

[51]

Byron Reeves and Clifford Nass. 2000. Perceptual user interfaces: perceptual bandwidth. Commun. ACM 43, 3 (March 2000), 65-70.

Digital Library

[52]

Katharina Rall, Margaret L. Satterthwaite, Anshul Vikram Pandey, John Emerson, Jeremy Boy, Oded Nov, and Enrico Bertini. 2016. Data visualization for human rights advocacy. Journal of Human Rights Practice, 8(2), 171-197. https://doi.org/10.1093/jhuman/huw011

[53]

Mary Beth Rosson and John Carroll. 2001. Usability Engineering: Scenario-Based Development of Human-Computer Interaction. Elsevier.

[54]

Marie Laure Ryan. 2006. Avatars of story. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

Digital Library

[55]

Ryan Schram. 2020. The state of the creator economy. Journal of Brand Strategy, 9 (2), 152-162.

[56]

Edward Segel and Jeffrey Heer. 2010. Narrative visualization: Telling stories with data. Visualization and Computer Graphics, IEEE Transactions on, 16(6), 1139-1148.

Digital Library

[57]

Benjamin Shneiderman. 1996. The eyes have it: A task by data type taxonomy for information visualizations. Proceedings of IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages, 336 – 343.

[58]

Dongyoung Sohn. 2011. Anatomy of interaction experience: Distinguishing sensory, semantic, and behavioral dimensions of interactivity. New Media & Society, 13(8), 1320–1335.

[59]

Florian Stalph. 2018. Classifying Data Journalism: A content analysis of daily data-driven stories. Journalism Practice, 12(10), 1332-1350. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2017.1386583

[60]

Jonathan Steuer. 1992. Defining virtual reality: Dimensions determining telepresence. Journal of Communication, 42(4), 73-93.

[61]

S. Shyam Sundar. 2007. Social psychology of interactivity in human-website interaction. In The Oxford Handbook of Internet Psychology, Adam Joinson, Katelyn McKenna, Tom Postmes, and Ulf-Dietrich Reips (Eds.), Oxford University Press, Oxford, 89-104.

[62]

S. Shyam Sundar. 2008. Self as source: Agency and customization in interactive media. In E. Konijn, S. Utz, M. Tanis, & S. Barnes (Eds.), Mediated Interpersonal Communication, 58-7. New York: Routledge.

[63]

S. Shyam Sundar, Haiyan Jia, Frank T. Waddell and Yan Huang. 2015. Toward a theory of interactive media effects (TIME): Four models for explaining how interface features affect user psychology. The Handbook of the Psychology of Communication Technology (pp. 47–86). Wiley Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118426456.ch3

[64]

S. Shyam Sundar, Saraswathi Bellur, Jeeyun Oh, Qian Xu and Haiyan Jia. 2014. User experience of on-screen interaction techniques: An experimental investigation of clicking, sliding, zooming, hovering, dragging and flipping. Human Computer Interaction, 29(2), 109-152.

Digital Library

[65]

S. Shyam Sundar, Saraswathi Bellur, Jeeyun Oh, Haiyan Jia and Hyang-Sook Kim. 2016. Theoretical importance of contingency in human-computer interaction: Effects of message interactivity on user engagement. Communication Research, 43(3), 595– 625.

[66]

S. Shyam Sundar, Sriram Kalyanaraman, and Justin Brown. 2003. Explicating website interactivity: Impression-formation effects in political campaign sites. Communication Research, 30(1), 30-59.

[67]

S. Shyam Sundar and Sampada S. Marathe. 2010. Personalization vs. customization: The importance of agency, privacy and power usage. Human Communication Research, 36(3), 298-322.

[68]

S. Shyam Sundar, Jeeyun Oh, Saraswathi Bellur, Haiyan Jia, and Hyang-Sook Kim. 2012. Interactivity as self-expression: A field experiment with customization and blogging. In Proceedings of the 2012 Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’12), ACM, New York, NY, 395- 404.

Digital Library

[69]

S. Shyam Sundar, Qian Xu, and Saraswathi Bellur. 2010. Designing interactivity in media interfaces: A communications perspective. In Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’10), ACM, New York, NY, 2247-2256.

Digital Library

[70]

S. Shyam Sundar, Qian Xu, Saraswathi Bellur, Jeeyun Oh, and Haiyan Jia. 2010. Modality is the message: Interactivity effects on perception and engagement. In proceedings of the 28th of the International Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA’10), ACM, New York, NY, 4105-4110.

Digital Library

[71]

Fabio Tagliabue, Luca Galassi and Pierpaolo Mariani. 2020. The “Pandemic” of Disinformation in COVID-19. SN Comprehensive Clinical Medicine, 2, 1287-1289. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42399-020-00439-1

[72]

William D. Taylor, Genevieve Johnson, Michael K. Ault, Jennifer A. Griffith, Bobby Rozzell Shane Connelly, Matthew L. Jensen, Norah E. Dunbar and Alisha M. Ness. 2015. Ideological group persuasion: A within-person study of how violence, interactivity, and credibility features influence online persuasion. Computers in Human Behavior, 51, 448-460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.04.071

Digital Library

[73]

The Guardian. 2010. Wikileaks Iraq: Data Journalism maps every death. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2010/oct/23/wikileaks-iraq-data-journalism.

[74]

Neil Thurman. 2008. Forums for citizen journalists? Adoption of user generated content initiatives by online news media. New Media & Society, 10(1), 139-157.

[75]

Mark Tremayne. 2008. Manipulating interactivity with thematically hyperlinked news texts: A media learning experiment. New Media & Society, 10, 703-727.

[76]

Jonathon H. Turner. 1988. A Theory of Social Interaction. Stanford University Press.

[77]

Bret Victor. 2006. Magic ink: Information software and the graphical interface. http://worrydream.com/#!/MagicInk.

[78]

Emily K. Vraga and Leticia Bode. 2020. Defining misinformation and understanding its bounded nature: Using expertise and evidence for describing misinformation. Political Communication, 37(1), 136-144. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2020.1716500

[79]

Katherine K. Wallman. 1993. Enhancing statistical literacy: Enriching our society. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 88(421), 1-8.

[80]

Colin Ware. 2013. Information Visualization: Perception for Design. Elsevier.

Digital Library

[81]

Jane Watson and Rosemary Callingham. 2003. Statistical literacy: A complex hierarchical construct. Statistics Education Research Journal, 2(2), 3-46.

[82]

Wibke Weber, Martin Engebretsen, M. and Helen Kennedy. 2018. Data stories: Rethinking journalistic storytelling in the context of data journalism. Studies in Communication Sciences, 2018(1), 191-206. https://doi.org/10.24434/j.scoms.2018.01.013

[83]

Alan Wexelblat and Pattie Maes. 1997. Using history to assist information browsing. In Proceedings of Computer-Assisted Information Retrieval on the Internet (RIAO'97), Montreal.

[84]

Bob G. Witmer and Michael J. Singer. 1998. Measuring presence in virtual environments: A presence questionnaire. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 7(3), 225-240.

Digital Library

[85]

Fan Yang, and Fuyuan Shen. 2017. Effects of web interactivity: A meta-analysis. Communication Research, 45(5), 635–658.

[86]

Judith Lynne Zaichkowsky. 1994. The personal involvement inventory: Reduction, revision, and application to advertising. Journal of Advertising, 23(4), 59-70.

[87]

Asta Zelenkauskaite and Bruno Simões. 2014. Big data through cross-platform interest- based interactivity. In 2014 International Conference on Big Data and Smart Computing (BIGCOMP), 191-196. IEEE.

Cited By

Fahmy NAttia M(2024)Innovative Journalism Practices: Insights for Reporting Science and Health IssuesPalgrave Handbook of Science and Health Journalism10.1007/978-3-031-49084-2_13(239-269)Online publication date: 2-Apr-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-49084-2_13
Sundar SLiao M(2023)Calling BS on ChatGPT: Reflections on AI as a Communication SourceJournalism & Communication Monographs10.1177/1522637923116713525:2(165-180)Online publication date: 8-May-2023
https://doi.org/10.1177/15226379231167135
Cotter LYang S(2023)Are interactive and tailored data visualizations effective in promoting flu vaccination among the elderly? Evidence from a randomized experimentJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association10.1093/jamia/ocad08731:2(317-328)Online publication date: 22-May-2023
https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocad087

Index Terms

News Informatics: Engaging Individuals with Data-Rich News Content through Interactivity in Source, Medium, and Message
1. Human-centered computing
  1. Human computer interaction (HCI)
    1. Empirical studies in HCI
  2. Visualization
    1. Empirical studies in visualization

Recommendations

Interactive television news

A new interactive television experience has been created for watching television news. The goal is to create a news experience that is similar to the way people watch television in their living rooms while giving viewers the power to make choices about ...
Using Interaction Data to Predict Engagement with Interactive Media
MM '21: Proceedings of the 29th ACM International Conference on Multimedia

Media is evolving from traditional linear narratives to personalised experiences, where control over information (or how it is presented) is given to individual audience members. Measuring and understanding audience engagement with this media is ...
Enhancing interactive television news
TVX '14: Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Interactive Experiences for TV and Online Video

A prototype system for interactive television news is described. It supports the full production cycle for interactive news, including assembly of clips into stories and stories into newscasts. A variety of interactive techniques are offered to the ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

CHI '22: Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

April 2022

10459 pages

ISBN:9781450391573

DOI:10.1145/3491102

Editors:
Simone Barbosa
PUC-Rio, Brazil
,
Cliff Lampe
University of Michigan, USA
,
Caroline Appert
Université Paris-Saclay, France
,
David A. Shamma
Toyota Research Institute, USA
,
Steven Drucker
Microsoft Research, USA
,
Julie Williamson
University of Glasgow, UK
,
Koji Yatani
University of Tokyo, Japan

Copyright © 2022 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

SIGCHI: ACM Special Interest Group on Computer-Human Interaction

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 29 April 2022

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Badges

Honorable Mention

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article
Research
Refereed limited

Funding Sources

U. S. National Science Foundation

Conference

CHI '22

Sponsor:

SIGCHI

CHI '22: CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

April 29 - May 5, 2022

LA, New Orleans, USA

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 6,199 of 26,314 submissions, 24%

Upcoming Conference

CHI 2025

Sponsor:
sigchi

ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

April 26 - May 1, 2025

Yokohama , Japan

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

3
Total Citations
View Citations
1,203
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)463
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)60

Reflects downloads up to 28 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Fahmy NAttia M(2024)Innovative Journalism Practices: Insights for Reporting Science and Health IssuesPalgrave Handbook of Science and Health Journalism10.1007/978-3-031-49084-2_13(239-269)Online publication date: 2-Apr-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-49084-2_13
Sundar SLiao M(2023)Calling BS on ChatGPT: Reflections on AI as a Communication SourceJournalism & Communication Monographs10.1177/1522637923116713525:2(165-180)Online publication date: 8-May-2023
https://doi.org/10.1177/15226379231167135
Cotter LYang S(2023)Are interactive and tailored data visualizations effective in promoting flu vaccination among the elderly? Evidence from a randomized experimentJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association10.1093/jamia/ocad08731:2(317-328)Online publication date: 22-May-2023
https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocad087
Jia HSundar S(2023)Vivid and Engaging: Effects of Interactive Data Visualization on Perceptions and Attitudes about Social IssuesDigital Journalism10.1080/21670811.2023.225081512:8(1205-1229)Online publication date: 31-Aug-2023
https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2023.2250815

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format.

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents