---
title: "Conceptual Figure Peer Critique Guide"
subtitle: "In-class paired review (Week 8, 2/26/2026)"
date: last-modified
---

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:

- the evaluation criteria in the [Conceptual Figure / Infographic Project assignment](conceptual_figure_infographic_project_assignment_2026.html), and
- Week 7 and 8 slides covering layout, design, and color principles

## 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
4. **Objective 1 (Elementary)**: Can you answer a specific lookup question quickly (about one element) without hunting?
5. **Objective 2 (Intermediate)**: Can you answer a small pattern/trend question (about a subset of elements) accurately?
6. **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).
