CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 2Academic Writing and PublishingData Visualization and AnalyticsVisual and Cognitive Learning Processes

Billboard-style posters preferred overall at two conferences, but should include more methods and limitations

Open access
Oronje, Benard, Morrison, Mike, Suharlim, Chris, Folkman, Kimberly, Glaude-Hosh, Angela, Jeisy-Scott, Victoria·2024·Qeios
DOI 10.32388/p7n5bo.2
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Scientific posters are a frequently used medium of communication at conferences and have grown in popularity over the last decades. However, the design of the traditional poster has largely remained stagnant despite emergence of new relevant research that could have unique implications for how scientific posters are designed for optimal learning. In this study, we examine the impact of a new minimalist, 'billboard-style' poster designed to transmit at least one piece of knowledge more efficiently. Attitudinal reactions to new and traditional poster designs were compared in two field studies. We found the billboard-style poster was perceived as easier to learn from, more interactive, and better for promoting scientific discovery. This supports the billboard-style poster design for use in scientific poster sessions. Results also suggested that future improvements to billboard-style designs should aim to efficiently communicate study methods in addition to key findings. Ultimately, these two field studies provide some initial evidence that meaningful improvements in poster effectiveness are possible, and that billboard-style layouts may be a step in the right direction that is worth developing further.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

In two field studies, attendees and presenters generally preferred a minimalist “billboard-style” scientific poster over the traditional IMRAD design, especially for visual appeal, ease of understanding the main message, and perceived interactivity. However, the billboard-style poster was not perceived as faster to prepare, and participants wanted future versions to communicate study methods and rigor more prominently.

Key findings

  • In Study 1 (all-billboard session), presenters (N = 26) indicated the billboard-style poster took less time to prepare, χ²(2, N = 26) = 19.60, p < .001; received more audience interaction, χ²(2, N = 26) = 26.00, p < .001; and was more likely to be used again, χ²(2, N = 26) = 27.91, p < .001.
  • In Study 1, the full sample (N = 59) rated billboard-style posters as more visually appealing, χ²(2, N = 59) = 62.87, p < .001; more approachable, χ²(2, N = 59) = 62.66, p < .001; better for learning, χ²(2, N = 59) = 36.68, p < .001; and better for promoting scientific discovery, χ²(2, N = 59) = 17.70, p < .001. There was no significant preference for whether billboard or traditional posters provided sufficient study information, χ²(2, N = 59) = .57, p = .75.
  • In Study 2 (mixed session), billboard-style posters did not take significantly less time to prepare (Med = 5.0 hours) than traditional posters (Med = 6.0 hours), z = 0.92, p = .36. Presenters perceived billboard-style posters as more interactive (M = 4.19, SD = 0.87) than traditional posters (M = 3.71, SD = 0.97), t(60) = -2.06, p = .04.
  • In Study 2, attendees (N = 33) preferred billboard-style posters for visual appearance (58%), χ²(2, N = 33) = 11.64, p = .003, and ease of understanding the main message (82%), χ²(2, N = 33) = 35.09, p < .001, but preferred traditional IMRAD posters for communicating details and rigor of the study (67%), χ²(2, N = 33) = 16.55, p < .001. Among presenters, 84% of billboard-style users versus 48% of traditional users intended to use the billboard-style format next, χ²(1, N = 62) = 9.19, p = .002.

Methods

  • Two field studies compared billboard-style and traditional IMRAD posters. Study 1 was a full rollout at the iHEA Immunization Economics pre-conference (2019), with 41 billboard-style poster presentations; 62 attendees were present, 59 completed surveys (95.16% response rate), including 26 presenters and 33 attendees. Study 2 was a mixed session at the CDC’s 2020 Laboratory Science Symposium, with 68 posters, 33 (48.5%) billboard-style; 95 respondents completed surveys (40% of attendees/presenters), including 62 presenters and 33 attendees.
  • Quantitative analysis used χ² goodness-of-fit tests against equal expected preference distributions, independent-sample t-tests for Likert-type responses, Mann-Whitney U-tests for preparation time, and χ² tests of independence for demographic/preference relationships, with Bonferroni corrections.
  • Qualitative open-ended responses were analyzed with conventional content analysis: 144 recording units, a codebook developed via constant comparative method, and independent coding by two authors with pooled kappa = .74.

Limitations

  • The paper states that both studies rely primarily on self-reported, subjective perceptions, and that “what people say may be different from what they do”; it calls for naturalistic measurements of behavior, which are difficult due to technological and ethical constraints.
  • The paper also states that environmental and contextual variables, such as cognitive overload and the number of posters in a room, likely affect attendee behavior, and that much more field work is needed.
  • Evident from the text: samples were small, especially attendee samples (N = 33 in Study 2), and the studies measured attitudes and intentions rather than objective learning or behavior; the tested billboard layout was an early “version 1” design, and newer layouts incorporating more methods and data had not yet been tested.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.32388/p7n5bo.2

Cites

35 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 1 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

5 of 25 cited sources checked · 3 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured

  • Premisecitation

    Today, posters are the most frequent medium through which scientific knowledge is disseminated at conferences.

    “Today, posters are the most frequent medium through which scientific knowledge is disseminated at conferences (Rowe, 2017;Rowe & Ilic, 2015).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Rowe, 2017 source
    • cites Rowe & Ilic, 2015 source
  • Findingown data

    The billboard-style poster design is perceived as being more interactive (M = 4.19, SD = 0.87) than the traditional poster design (M = 3.71, SD = 0.97), t(60) = -2.06, p = .04.

    “A significant difference was found, t (60) = -2.06,p = .04,indicating that the billboard-style poster design is perceived as being more interactive (M = 4.19, SD = 0.87) than the traditional poster design (M = 3.71, SD = 0.97).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Presenters perceived the billboard-style layout as being easier to prepare than the traditional IMRAD layout.

    “Presenters perceived the billboard-style layout as being easier (but not faster) to prepare, more interactive to attendees, and in both studies voiced a desire to use the billboard-style poster layout over IMRAD in future conferences.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Billboard-style posters were preferred by attendees for promoting scientific discovery.

    “and promoting scientific discovery chi-squared (2, N = 59) = 17.70, p < .001”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    The poster design presented at the CDC LSS conference had a significant effect on the intention to use a certain poster design at the next presentation (chi-squared (1, N= 62) = 9.19, p = 0.002).

    “A significant effect of presented poster design was found, chi-squared (1, N= 62) = 9.19, p = 0.002).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims. 13
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 33

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Pre-training has been shown to reduce the cognitive load of subsequent learning sessions and to ultimately improve learning outcomes.

    “Pre-training has been shown to reduce the cognitive load of subsequent learning sessions and to ultimately improve learning outcomes (Mayer & Moreno, 2003).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Mayer & Moreno, 2003 source

      The Type 2 Overload section (p. 6) reports better problem-solving transfer performance after pretraining and interprets the results as support for reducing cognitive load. The Future directions section (p. 10) says load reduction remains a hypothesis needing direct measurement, so the claim overstates what has been shown about cognitive load. (LLM, conf=0.85)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Morrison (2020) suggested that successfully teaching attendees more about the study before they stop to talk could increase the amount of 'pre-training'.

    “Morrison (2020) suggested that successfully teaching attendees more about the study before they stop to talk could increase the amount of what Mayer and Moreno (2003) refer to as 'pre-training', where a learner learns some details about a concept in advance, prior to a more intensive training session (typically a class, but here this could be talking to the presenter).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Morrison (2020)

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites Mayer and Moreno (2003) source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Pirolli and Card's (1999) information foraging theory and Mayer and Moreno's (2003) work on cognitive load and cognitive overload reduction were especially influential on the billboard-style design.

    “Especially influential were Pirolli and Card's (1999) information foraging theory and Mayer and Moreno's (2003) work on cognitive load and cognitive overload reduction.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Pirolli and Card's (1999) source
    • cites Mayer and Moreno's (2003) source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    In terms of user engagement, aesthetic usability is a factor in the perceived interaction cost of a design, with higher aesthetic usability resulting in a sense of lower interaction cost and thus a greater likelihood of engaging with a particular design.

    “In terms of user engagement, aesthetic usability is a factor in the perceived interaction cost of a design, with higher aesthetic usability resulting in a sense of lower interaction cost and thus a greater likelihood of engaging with a particular design (Grishin, 2018).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Grishin, 2018

      Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Findingown data

    Participants in both studies felt that future improvements to the billboard-style layout should focus on communicating study methods and rigor more prominently, in addition to the key takeaway.

    “However, participants in both studies felt that future improvements to the billboard-style layout should focus on communicating study methods and rigor more prominently, in addition to the key takeaway.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The billboard-style poster was perceived as better for communicating scientific findings but had mixed opinions for providing sufficient information about the research.

    “These findings complement the quantitative results; the billboard-style poster was perceived as better for communicating scientific findings but had mixed opinions for providing sufficient information about the research.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingnone given

    During codebook development, three overarching categories of qualitative response were identified: poster features, poster experience, and irrelevant information.

    “During codebook development, three overarching categories of qualitative response were identified: poster features, poster experience, and irrelevant information.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    In psychology, behavioral intentions are formed by a number of factors, including attitudes towards that target, the opinions of valued others toward the behavior, and previous habits.

    “In psychology, behavioral intentions (i.e., the intention to do something in the future) are formed by a number of factors, including attitudes towards that target (here, posters), the opinions of valued others toward the behavior, and previous habits (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1976;Triandis, 1980).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Fishbein & Ajzen, 1976 source
    • cites Triandis, 1980

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductown data

    A Bonferroni correction was applied with a significance cutoff value of alpha = .0056 to account for multiple comparisons.

    “To account for the multiple comparisons, a Bonferroni correction was applied with a significance cutoff value of alpha = .0056.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    A lack of visual clutter is thought to be one factor in perceived usability.

    “A lack of visual clutter is thought to be one factor in perceived usability (Lam, 2008).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Lam, 2008 source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given

    A survey was administered during the poster session to n=95 respondents, representing 40% of people who attended or presented at the poster session.

    “A survey was administered during the poster session to n=95 respondents, representing 40% of people who attended or presented at the poster session.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    The wide focus of a poster session may also promote serendipitous learning of stumbling across unexpected insight outside an attendee's normal research area.

    “The wide focus of a poster session may also promote serendipitous learning of stumbling across unexpected insight outside an attendee's normal research area (Lane et al., 2021).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Lane et al., 2021

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationown data

    The findings support the billboard-style poster design for use in scientific poster sessions.

    “This supports the billboard-style poster design for use in scientific poster sessions.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    The qualitative codebook was developed using the constant comparative method.

    “Codebook was developed using the constant comparative method.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given

    The CDC billboard-style template was reviewed by OADC's Quality Assessment Quality Control Office and underwent usability testing to ensure quality and design standards were met.

    “This template was further reviewed by OADC's Quality Assessment Quality Control Office and underwent usability testing to ensure quality and design standards were met.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductown data

    To account for the multiple comparisons, a Bonferroni correction was applied with a significance cutoff value of alpha = .0125.

    “To account for the multiple comparisons, a Bonferroni correction was again applied, with a significance cutoff value of alpha = .0125.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    A central tenant in the field of User Experience Design is that when something is easier to do, people will do it more.

    “A central tenant in the field of User Experience Design is that when something is easier to do, people will do it more (Krug, 2022).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Krug, 2022

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Participants in the all-billboard-style session felt that the billboard-style posters aided their own learning and promoted discovery in science over the traditional design.

    “Participants in the all-billboard-style session, especially, felt that the billboard-style posters aided their own learning and promoted discovery in science over the traditional design.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Rowe and Illic (2015) called for an overhaul of the traditional scientific poster design.

    “Rowe and Illic (2015) especially called for an overhaul of the traditional scientific poster design.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Rowe and Illic (2015)

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductcitation

    The open-ended survey responses were analyzed using conventional content analysis.

    “The open-ended survey responses were analyzed using conventional content analysis (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Hsieh & Shannon, 2005 source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    To be eligible to take the survey, poster session attendees must have viewed a minimum of 8 posters with at least 3 of those posters being the new billboard-style design.

    “To be eligible to take the survey, poster session attendees must have viewed a minimum of 8 posters with at least 3 of those posters being the new billboard-style design.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Across both studies, the billboard-style design was perceived as more interactive and as making it easier to learn at least the main takeaway from every poster in the room.

    “Across both studies, the billboard-style design was perceived as more interactive, and as making it easier to learn at least the main takeaway from every poster in the room.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    The remaining qualitative results were largely inconsistent or idiosyncratic, suggesting that these findings may represent individuals' personal preferences instead of reliable evaluations of the billboard-style design.

    “The remaining qualitative results were largely inconsistent or idiosyncratic, suggesting that these findings may represent individuals' personal preferences instead of reliable evaluations of the billboard-style design (e.g., participants indicating approval or disapproval for the QR code).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    The codebook was discussed with all authors.

    “The codebook was discussed with all authors.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The features of the billboard-style design were derived from empirically based recommendations from the fields of Instructional Design and Human Factors.

    “The features of this billboard-style design were derived from empirically based recommendations from the fields of Instructional Design and Human Factors.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The billboard-style approach to posters is new and still evolving, with many new layouts introduced even since the data were collected.

    “The 'billboard-style' approach to posters is new and still evolving, with many new layouts introduced even since our data was collected (see Morrison, 2020).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Morrison, 2020

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Previous research on scientific poster sessions has questioned their effectiveness in facilitating knowledge transfer between poster presenters and session attendees.

    “Previous research on scientific poster sessions has questioned their effectiveness in facilitating knowledge transfer between poster presenters and session attendees.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    A number of environmental and contextual variables, especially cognitive overload, likely impact attendee behavior in a poster session.

    “Finally, a number of environmental and contextual variables likely impact attendee behavior in a poster session; especially, cognitive overload.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    A new billboard-style poster was introduced to the scientific community and rapidly gained national attention.

    “In response to these criticisms of the text-heavy, Introduction-Methods-Results Analysis-Discussion (IMRAD) poster design, a new billboard-style poster (Figure 1,b) was introduced to the scientific community and rapidly gained national attention (Greenfieldboyce, 2019;Morrison, 2019).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Greenfieldboyce, 2019

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites Morrison, 2019

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Several studies have faulted the design and format of the traditional poster as the main impediment to maximizing knowledge transfer with the ever-increasing crowds in poster sessions.

    “Several studies have faulted the design and format of the traditional poster as the main impediment to maximizing knowledge transfer with the ever-increasing crowds in poster sessions (Dubois, 1985;Saffran, 1987).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Dubois, 1985 source
    • cites Saffran, 1987 source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Billboard-style layouts may be a step in the right direction that is worth developing further.

    “Ultimately, these two field studies provide some initial evidence that meaningful improvements in poster effectiveness are possible, and that billboard-style layouts may be a step in the right direction that is worth developing further.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationown data

    For billboard posters to fully overtake the traditional design in all areas (at least in terms of attendee perceptions), more work is needed to make them communicate study data and methods effectively.

    “However, for billboard posters to fully overtake the traditional design in all areas (at least in terms of attendee perceptions) more work likely needs to be done to make them communicate study data and methods effectively as well.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Scientists may benefit from networking with other researchers and building deeper transactive memory about who is studying what.

    “Scientists may benefit from networking with other researchers and building deeper transactive memory about who is studying what (Brandon, 2004).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Brandon, 2004

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Achieving a lower interaction cost results in a number of positive outcomes, especially in terms of increased user engagement.

    “As discussed previously, achieving a lower interaction cost results in a number of positive outcomes, especially in terms of increased user engagement (Lam, 2008).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Lam, 2008 source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    Any remaining discrepancies in the qualitative responses were discussed until full agreement was reached.

    “Finally, any remaining discrepancies in the qualitative responses were discussed until full agreement was reached.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    Two authors independently coded the qualitative responses, resulting in moderate interrater reliability (pooled kappa = .74).

    “Third, two authors independently coded the qualitative responses, resulting in moderate interrater reliability (pooled kappa = .74;De Vries et al., 2008).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites De Vries et al., 2008 source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    This billboard layout was designed to transmit the main takeaway of the study prior to stopping, in contrast to the traditional poster which communicates only the general subject through the title.

    “Namely, this billboard layout was designed to transmit the main takeaway of the study prior to stopping, in contrast to the traditional poster which communicates only the general subject through the title (Morrison, 2019).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Morrison, 2019

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    Poster session attendees and presenters were surveyed at the conclusion of the session with a response rate of 95.16% (59 of 62 attendees).

    “Poster session attendees and presenters were surveyed at the conclusion of the session (62 attendees, 59 respondents, response rate 95.16%).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
38 of 38

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    For the expected preferences, there is an equal distribution of preferences across all three response options (1/3 prefer the alternative/billboard-style poster, 1/3 prefer the traditional poster, and 1/3 indicate no preference).

    “For the expected preferences, we assumed an equal distribution of preferences across all three response options (e.g., 1/3 of participants preferred the alternative poster design, 1/3 of participants preferred the traditional poster design, and 1/3 of participants indicated no preference for traditional or alternative poster design).”
    “For the expected preferences, we assumed an equal distribution of preferences across all three response options (e.g., 1/3 of participants preferred the billboard-style poster design, 1/3 of participants preferred the traditional IMRAD poster design, and 1/3 of participants indicated no preference for traditional or billboard-style poster design).”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    A small improvement to a poster's ability to transmit knowledge could accelerate learning across science.

    “Given how many posters are presented every year, a small improvement to the poster's ability to transmit knowledge could accelerate learning across science.”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Qualitative quotes indicating an online poster refer to the QR code experience.

    “Any quotes indicating an online poster were assumed to refer to the QR code experience”
3 of 3

Statistics recomputed

Every reported test result, recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom. A result shows as not adding up only once an independent check has confirmed it.

  • Consistentz = 0.92reported p = .36 · recomputed p = .358

    “z = 0.92, p = .36”

  • Consistentt(60) = -2.06reported p = .04 · recomputed p = .044

    “t (60) = -2.06,p = .04”

2 of 2

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Time-to-prepare result is labeled as support for the effort hypothesis

    Minor

    The reported result concerns which poster takes less time to prepare, but Hypothesis 1a concerns effort. Time to prepare is the subject of Hypothesis 1b, so the stated hypothesis attribution does not match the result.

  • Traditional posters are assigned to the billboard-style figure panel

    Minor

    The Study 2 description identifies Figure 1B as a traditional IMRAD poster, while the figure description identifies panel B as billboard-style and panel A as traditional.

2 of 2

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Triandis, H. C. (1980). Values, attitudes, and interpersonal behavior. In H. E. Howe & M. M. Page (Eds.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation 1979 (pp. 195-259). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press Qeios, CC-BY 4.0 • Article, January 19, 2024 Qeios ID: P7N5BO.2 • https://doi.org/10.32388/P7N5BO.2 24/24 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Oronje, B., Morrison, M., Suharlim, C., Folkman, K., Glaude-Hosh, A., & Jeisy-Scott, V.
Affiliations
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (US)
  • Michigan State University (US)
  • Management Sciences for Health (US)
ORCID
Venue
Qeios
Publisher
Qeios Ltd
Published
2024-01-19
ISSN
2632-3834 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.32388/p7n5bo.2
OpenAlex
W4391032190
Cited by
2
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
Qeios (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Academic Writing and Publishing
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Data Visualization and Analytics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
Keywords
research posters, poster layout, science communication

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-11-05.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-11-05.

Cited sources are checked by gpt-6-sol.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review