1 2 3 State R&D Graphic, Version 1 Version 1 4 State - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1

2

3

State R&D Graphic, Version 1 Version 1

4

State R&D Graphic, Version 1, Version 1, markup

5

Framework for Monetary Flow for R&D

State R&D Graphic, Version 3

Federal Government State Government Other Funding Sources (local governments, other state governments, businesses, non-profits, etc.

Version 3 (Tested with respondents,

Your Agency’ s Total R&D

p , Spring 2015)

Internal External Higher Educational Other Entities Companies and Your Agency Higher Educational Institutions Other Entities Performing R&D Companies and Individuals

6

Respondent Reactions Respondent Reactions

• Comprehension good
• Some respondents attended to text more than

Some respondents attended to text more than icons i l d d d i

• Title sounded too academic
• All male figures, some females needed

g ,

7

R&D Funding Structures

State R&D Graphic, Version 3c

Federal Government State Government Other Funding Sources (local governments, other state governments, businesses, non-profits, etc.)

Version 3c

Your Agency’ s Total R&D Internal External Higher Educational Other Entities Companies and Your Agency Higher Educational Institutions Other Entities Performing R&D Companies and Individuals

8

R&D Funding Structures

State R&D Graphic, Version 3d

Federal Government State Government Other Funding Sources (local governments, other state governments, businesses, non-profits, etc.)

Version 3d

Your Agency’s Total R&D Internal External g y Your Agency Higher Educational Institutions Other Entities Performing R&D Companies and Individuals

9

R&D Funding Structures

State R&D Graphic, Version 4

Federal Government State Government Other Funding Sources (local governments, other state governments, businesses, non-profits, etc.)

Version 4

Your Agency’ s Total R&D Internal External Your Agency Higher Educational Institutions Other Entities Performing R&D Companies and Individuals

10

Challenges Challenges

D l i hi th t b l tilit f

• Developing a graphic that balances utility for

respondents, graphic designer expertise, and programming resources programming resources.

• Programming constraint: no custom

programming at this time (result: no graphics programming at this time (result: no graphics with questions, but links are ok).

– Where should the graphic be placed if it can’t be – Where should the graphic be placed, if it can t be displayed in full with the question? – How do we encourage respondents to make extra g p clicks to see the graphic, when we know they are reluctant to do so?

11

Non-Profit R&D Graphic, Version 1

Federal Other sources Individual donors Internal funds Other nonprofits Businesses State and local Federal government Internal funds, including endowments Other nonprofits, including universi es Businesses State and local government Your

• rganiza on’s

funds for research

Research Performance Research Funding

Your organiza on Universi es or

• ther educa onal

en es Other nonprofit

• rganiza ons

Businesses Other

12

Non-Profit R&D Graphic Tested with respondents (Summer 2015)

13

Discussion Questions Discussion Questions

H t t d ( d) hi /di f

• Have you tested (or used) graphics/diagrams for

data collection? How did respondents react to them?

• What made the graphics/diagrams work well, or

not? H i ht th hi /di f d t

• How might these graphics/diagrams for data

collection be modified for use in data dissemination? dissemination?

• Where are the graphics placed relative to the

question(s)? With mailout? With question? Included i li h l ? in online survey help?

• What can we do during data collection to determine

how useful (or unuseful) the graphic is to how useful (or unuseful) the graphic is to respondents?

• How can graphics be made more usable from an

ibilit ti ?

14

Contact Information Contact Information

• Rebecca L. Morrison

– RLMorris@nsf.gov @ g – 703.292.7794

H idi St O

• Heidi St.Onge

– Heidi.M.St.Onge@census.gov – 301.763.3322

15