Color, especially green for arguments in favor and red for arguments against, is widely used by producers to categorize for and against arguments¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2016 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Color was used to separate for and against arguments in most diagrams, with green used for arguments in favor and red for arguments against in 14 of 20 diagrams. → Marije van Amelsvoort 2016

Evidence¶

Marije van Amelsvoort 2016¶

Marije van Amelsvoort, Alfons Maes. (2016). Show me your opinion. Perceptual cues in creating and reading argument diagrams. Instructional Science 44:335–357. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-016-9378-9

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Production study of 20 diagrams: color use to categorize for/against arguments was above chance (p < .001 as printed), with "green was used for arguments in favor and/or red was used for arguments against" in 14 of 20 diagrams. No effect size printed.

"Instead of boxes or shapes, color has been widely used to categorize for and against arguments, p \ .001. In 14 out of 20 diagrams, green was used for arguments in favor and/or red was used for arguments against."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Readers' judgment explanations support a cautious hierarchy of perceptual cues: content, then color, then space, then graphic features — related
• Readers judge a diagram's argumentative position above chance in all conditions except when both text and color are absent, and deleting graphics is more detrimental than deleting text — related
• Producers signal their own argumentative position with arrows pointing toward their own arguments and more boxes around own arguments — related