Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 2 Assessment of diagramming effectiveness

From: The efficiency and effectiveness of utilizing diagrams in interviews: an assessment of participatory diagramming and graphic elicitation

  Measure Graphic Elicitation (Diagrams B/C) Participatory Diagramming (Diagram A)
6 Number (mean (range)) of positions/organizations added to diagram physically and verbally Physical: 7 (1–15) Verbal: 0 (0–7) Physical: 2 (0–11) Verbal: 1 (0–8)
7 Number (mean (range)) of unique positions/organizations added to diagram physically and verbally – excluding the 23 unique positions/organizations presented on Diagrams B/C Physical Unique: 4 (0–9) Verbal Unique: 0 (0–3) Physical Unique: 1 (0–9) Verbal Unique: 1 (0–5)
8 Number (mean (range)) of relationships (arrows/lines) added to diagram physically and verbally Physical: 7 (0–20) Verbal: 1 (0–11) Physical: 3 (0–18) Verbal: 2 (0–12)
9 Number (mean (range)) of unique relationships (arrows/lines) added physically and verbally – excluding the 33 unique relationships presented on Diagrams B/C Physical Unique: 4 (0–12) Verbal Unique: 1 (0–6) Physical Unique: 3 (0–16) Verbal Unique: 2 (0–12)
10 Number (mean (range)) of relationships (arrows/lines) modified physically and verbally n/a Physical: 3 (0–12) Verbal: 3 (0–12)
11 Percentage of interviewees returning to Diagram A after viewing Diagrams B/C 17% (11/64) returned n/a
12 Number (mean (range)) of additions/edits made to Diagram A after viewing Diagrams B/C Positions/Organizations added/edited upon return to Diagram A: 1 (0–2) Relationships added/edited upon return to Diagram A: 1 (0–4) n/a
  Qualitative observations Verbal comments accompanying diagrams captured greater breadth of response reflecting information not identified in pre-interview review work. Verbal comments accompanying diagrams focused on researcher-prepared items, with responses including more details, insights and examples.