Different clues from different views: The role of image format in public perceptions of neuroimaging results

Madeleine Keehner & Lisa Mayberry & Martin H. Fischer


Abstract We examined whether different types of brain
images affect readers’ evaluations of scientific reports. Five
different brain images were selected from the neuroscience
literature: a whole brain, an inflated brain, a cross-sectional
brain slice, a glass brain, and a topographic map. First, the
images were subjectively rated by 31 nonexperts for
qualities associated with realism and perceived complexity.
Each of the five images was later presented alongside one
of five fictitious neuroscience articles (image–text pairings
counterbalanced), and a different group of 122 novices
rated the accompanying articles for scientific reasoning.
They also separately reported their familiarity with each
image type. Brain images previously rated as more threedimensional
produced more positive evaluations of the
articles with which they were presented. Perceived image
complexity also showed a marginal nonlinear relationship
with article credibility ratings. Our findings suggest that
choice of image format matters when disseminating
neuroscience research to the general public.