Then next speaker at AoIR 2018 is Eedan Amit-Danhi, who continues our focus on the 2016 U.S. presidential election and especially investigates the role of infographics during this contest. Such infographics have become increasingly important in recent years, partly as a result of the rise of digital and social media – but what makes specific infographics successful?
Enhancers of an infographic’s success may be cognitive (employing proven infographic presentation methods), behavioural (calling users to action and providing interactive features), or emotional (triggering users’ positive or negative emotions). The present study examined the infographics used by the final four presidential candidates (Trump, Clinton, Sanders, and Cruz), and coded for the presence of these enhancers; success was measured in the form of shares and likes.
Cognitive features were generally highly effective: this included the identification of sources, the use of rhetoric comparing between the different values shown on the infographic, and the use of traditional scientific charting styles. Behavioural features were ineffective or produced negative results: clickable elements included in the infographic did not increase its shareability. Emotional features did not seem affect the sharing of such infographics at all, on the level of the overall dataset – but this varied significantly across the candidates: Trump’s infographics included considerable triggers of anger, and this helped them being shared, while Saunders’s infographics contained substantial positive emotions, and this also improved engagement.
Infographic success is determined by external authenticity (staying true to the data) as well as internal authenticity (staying true to the candidate’s identity), therefore. The former seems to be true for all successful infographics by these candidates; the latter is pronounced especially for those candidates who are already outsiders and are drawing to a substantial extent on emotional triggers in their overall campaigning activities.