ABSTRACT

Visualizations are emerging as a means of spreading digital misinformation. Prior work has shown that visualization interpretation can be manipulated through slanted titles that favor only one side of the visual story, yet people still think the visualization is impartial. In this work, we study whether such effects continue to exist when titles and visualizations exhibit greater degrees of misalignment: titles whose message differs from the visually cued message in the visualization, and titles whose message contradicts the visualization. We found that although titles with a contradictory slant triggered more people to identify bias compared to titles with a miscued slant, visualizations were persistently perceived as impartial by the majority. Further, people's recall of the visualization's message more frequently aligned with the titles than the visualization. Based on these results, we discuss the potential of leveraging textual components to detect and combat visual-based misinformation with text-based slants.