Graphics in written directions: Appreciated by readers but not writers

This series of studies investigated the ability of literate adults to exploit communications options that are available to writers but have no counterpart in speech. Specifically it examined people's use of sketches when giving written directions to help a stranger cross town. When writing an informal letter to a friend most directions were given in prose paragraph style (Experiment 1). Almost no‐one included a sketch, even if given a street map as an aid. Yet most subjects could draw adequate sketch maps (Experiment 2), and everyone said yes when asked whether they would include a sketch in a letter. So the previous choices were not constrained either by graphic skill or by judgements concerning the appropriateness of a sketch, When people were asked to 'design' the back page of a leaflet they still did not include a sketch (Experiment 3). Experiment 4 showed that any bias in the instructions was towards rather than against the use of sketches. The need to generate the sketch was removed in Experiment 5 where subjects composed the leaflet page from pre‐formed sections that included alternative routes in both words and diagrams. Nearly all subjects now included a sketch in their directions. In case subjects previously, in haste, had not considered the possibility of including a sketch map, they were made aware of the drawing option by rating the usability of route information in a variety of communication styles immediately before writing their own directions (Experiment 6). People rated directions that included diagrams as significantly more usable, but still most subjects did not include a sketch in the directions they gave. So the communication styles that readers recognized as successful were not determining their choices as writers. It is suggested that, when giving written directions, inexperienced writers rely too heavily on how they would respond as speakers.