Conceptual Figure Peer Critique Guide

In-class paired review (Week 8, 2/26/2026)

Published

March 12, 2026

PSYC 859 Spring 2026

Goal

Use a structured peer review to identify concrete revisions that make your figure:

  • self-standing (readable without you narrating it),
  • aligned with your audience and takeaway message, and
  • cleanly designed (layout, typography, color, annotation, emphasis).

This guide builds on:

Starting point

Each person should provide:

  • A draft of your figure, shown at its intended size (print or 100% zoom).
  • One key sentence summarizing the intended audience and main takeaway message.
  • Your current title/caption and any key annotations (even if rough).

30-Minute Schedule (Pairs)

Minutes Activity
0-2 Setup and swap figures
2-8 Silent review and notes (both people)
8-15 Partner 1 feedback (Reviewer 2 shares suggestions)
15-22 Partner 2 feedback (Reviewer 1 shares suggestions)
22-30 Wrap up discussion and record a revision plan (Both partners)

Setup (0-2 min)

  1. Swap figures.
  2. Each author tells their partner their one-sentence audience + takeaway statement (no extra explanation).
  3. Open the figure at intended size (print or 100% zoom).

Stage 1: Silent Review + Notes (2-8 min)

Write notes directly on paper or in a doc. Focus on evidence-based critique (what a viewer will likely perceive and conclude).

Work through Bertin’s three stages and three objectives.

Stages

  1. Stage 1 (External): From the title/caption/labels alone, what do you think the figure is about and what is shown?
  2. Stage 2 (Internal): What marks and visual channels are used (position, size, shape, color, line type)? Do they appear consistent and interpretable?
  3. Stage 3 (Relationships): What relationships or inferences does the figure invite you to make? What is the overall point you will remember?

Objectives

  1. Objective 1 (Elementary): Can you answer a specific lookup question quickly (about one element) without hunting?
  2. Objective 2 (Intermediate): Can you answer a small pattern/trend question (about a subset of elements) accurately?
  3. Objective 3 (Overall): Can you state the figure’s overall message in one sentence, and is that message supported by title/caption/annotation?

A. Message Comprehension

  • In one sentence: what do you think the figure’s main takeaway is?
  • What do you notice first (salience)? Does that match the intended takeaway?
  • What is confusing, ambiguous, or easy to misread?

B. Assignment Objectives (Does It Achieve The Goals?)

  • Self-standing: Do the title/caption/annotations make the message understandable without narration?
  • Audience fit: Is the level of detail and terminology right for the stated audience?
  • Conceptual structure: Are constructs, mechanisms, and relationships visually explicit (not just implied)?
  • Quantitative integrity (if applicable): Are any quantitative elements accurate, interpretable, and matched to the message?

C. Design Coherence

You don’t need to go through all of these, but consider how well design principles are used in the figure to convey a clear message.

  • Data-ink / non-data-ink: What could be erased or simplified without losing information?
  • Chartjunk vs. useful embellishment: Any decorative elements competing with the message? Any embellishment that truly supports recall or interpretation?
  • Cleveland-style clarity checks:
  • Does the data/idea stand out (not the scaffolding)?
  • Are there too many tick marks/grid lines/borders/boxes?
  • Are labels/keys placed so they do not clutter the main data/diagram region?
  • Are reference lines used only when they clarify an important value?

Six fundamental design principles: - Contrast: are related items visually similar, unrelated items different? - Repetition: are styles reused consistently (fonts, shapes, line weights, colors)? - Alignment: do elements snap to an intentional grid/structure? - Proximity: are related items closer than unrelated ones? - Movement: does the layout guide the eye in a deliberate sequence? - Balance: does the figure feel visually stable (not top-heavy/left-heavy)?

D. Color And Accessibility

  • Does the use of color as a visual channel add to the message and aesthetics?
  • Are palette types matched to the task (e.g., categorical for discrete types)?
  • Are ordered colormaps perceptually reasonable (avoid rainbow defaults for ordered data)?
  • Are color distinctions conservative enough to be discriminable (especially for luminance/saturation)?

E. Annotations And Text

  • What text is essential to interpretation (and where should it live: labels, callouts, caption)?
  • Are annotations placed where the eye needs them (near the relevant visual element)?
  • Is typography legible at intended size (font size, weight, line spacing)?

F. Your Top 3 Recommendations (Actionable)

Write your top three suggestions for concrete changes. Each should name what to change and why.

Stage 2: Discussion (minutes 8-22)

Wrap-Up: Revision Plan (minutes 22-30)

Each author writes a short plan (bullet points are fine):

  • The single sentence your figure should communicate.
  • The top 3 changes you will make before final submission.
  • One design principle from Week 7 you will deliberately use (e.g., contrast, proximity, reducing chartjunk, improved color channel choice).
  • One question you still have (to ask in class or of peers outside of class).