Figures are powerful tools for communicating scientific information, but their effectiveness can only be maximized if graphic design principles are followed. Panel arrangement, sequencing, sizing, and spacing can all affect figure clarity and impact. As such, scientists should take advantage of what they can potentially do with these aspects, rather than default to identically-sized panels arranged in a grid pattern.
Planning Layouts for Scientific Figures
When creating a layout, researchers need to keep in mind how they would like information to be organized. Typically, scientific data is clustered thematically, with key findings flanked by supporting evidence. Graphically, this can translate as a large central panel A accompanied by smaller panels B, C, and D, and so forth. That said, this may not always be feasible depending on the type of data being presented. Bar and line graphs are generally suitable for large and small panels, but heatmaps and histograms usually need larger sizes for legibility. Researchers will always have to determine what makes the most sense for their own data.
The main and supporting panels together should be contained within a recognizable geometric shape—that is, if the supporting panels are stacked vertically, the total height should not exceed the height of the main panel. The same applies for width if stacked horizontally. Wider spacing between panel clusters, combined with narrower spacing within clusters, can help distinguish the intended groupings.
Finally, because the English language is read from left to right and top to bottom, figures for English-language manuscripts should also be designed with this read direction in mind. This is particularly important when it comes to panel clusters. If panels D and E provide supporting evidence for panel C, they should be located next to each other rather than on different rows on opposite sides of the figure.
Fixing Small Discrepancies and Errors
Humans are very good at identifying and fixating on things that should not be there. For example, if there is a typo in the text, people will notice. The same principle applies to scientific figures, except here, in addition to typos in text labels, scientists have to contend with potential inconsistencies in a host of elements including font sizes, bar widths/line thicknesses, misaligned axes/borders/panels, and scale discrepancies. In the best case scenario, these discrepancies serve as a distraction for the reader. In the worst case scenario, they can make the message harder to understand.
While the process can feel pedantic, taking the time to ensure consistency, both within and across figures, can be the difference between a manuscript that gets read and one that gets skimmed or ignored. This means making sure that font sizes are uniform throughout the manuscript, that labeling practices remain the same across figures, and that the experimental group assigned the color red in figure 1 is not blue in figure 2. One only gets a single opportunity to make a first impression, so it is best to not have that first impression be “those panels do not align properly.”
Using Text in Figures to Aid Understanding
Figures are an opportunity for scientists to present information that would be difficult to process through text. However, that does not mean that text is not an essential part of scientific figures. In addition to labels to define experimental groups, short annotations can highlight important comparisons or findings within larger datasets. Annotations are particularly useful for more comprehensive visualization techniques such as heat maps or scatter plots, or to point out specific areas of interest within photographs. Placing these notes directly within the figures not only removes the need for the reader to switch back and forth between the graphic and the text, it also streamlines the legend. That said, although annotations are largely text-based, researchers should treat them as graphical elements, applying the same standards of positioning, consistency, and legibility to them as they would a graph or image.
Take Advantage of a Powerful Tool
Like any part of a manuscript, figures exist to convey and clarify a scientific message. Similarly, a sloppy figure can confuse the audience and muddle the story. Polished and professional figures are an excellent vector for drawing audiences into a study, breaking down complex information in a logical and aesthetically pleasing way. Humans may be good at fixating on things that stick out, but that works for both good and ill. Scientists should take care that their figures stick out for the right reasons.
Looking for more information on scientific writing? Check out The Scientist’s TS SciComm section. Looking for some help putting together a manuscript, a figure, a poster, or anything else? The Scientist’s Scientific Services may have the professional help that you need.
