Better images for mind maps
A criterion for choosing images that increase reading productivity
One of the steps in the elaboration of a mind map is illustration. Well, it may be, because we don't always decide to illustrate, we don't always have the images we need, we can't always or know how to produce them, we don't always have time to illustrate.
In illustrating, an image has a degree of quality. The aspect related to image quality that we are going to talk about here is the readability of an image. This word applied to images may sound strange, but we will show here that certain images are more appropriate for mind maps, because they impact reading productivity.
The criterion
Look at the images below, one at a time:
Now look at these, in the same way:
What is a fundamental difference between the two groups related to the speed of understanding the image, that is, the apprehension of its meaning? Go back to the first group and try to answer the question:
"How many looks do I have to give to the image to fully understand it?"
Maybe you even went through the second set more quickly. Although we will not theorize about image perception here, the practical fact is that certain images can be recognized and interpreted at first glance, and others require two or more. Note that "first look" images are simpler in terms of number of elements and more defined, while lower productivity images can have several elements, diffuse colors and are sometimes structured, having different levels (like something inside something else) or scenarios, such as the last one in group 1.
A particularly interesting case is the structured image but with visual patterns, such as the one below. We soon notice that there is something repeated in it, which helps to assemble understanding.
As additional references to support what we have said - somewhat exaggerated, we admit, but understand this as a didactic resource - look at the images below and try to notice how many looks you need to give to understand them minimally.
(If you couldn't fully understand the one on the left, don't be surprised, it's in the category of visual ambiguities. The second is a painting by Salvador Dali. Images from the website www.Possibilidades.com.br).
Clarifying the looks
If the concept of multiple looks is still somewhat abstract for you, a few simple experiments will better support this idea. Look around you for something yellow (if you can't find it, choose another color). As you do so, try to notice how you do it: essentially, you scan the room looking for the color; When he finally finds it, he stabilizes his gaze and attention on the object or part of the object that has the color sought. This moment of stabilization is what characterizes a look.
Now look for a green-colored object that has something written on it. You will again look for the color; when he finds it, he stabilizes the focus of attention on the object and then sees if there is anything written on it; finding, it stabilizes again in writing. In this case you had to take at least two glances to get the targeted result.
Small, in-detail, well-shaped images allow you to process them—recognize and interpret—them with just the first glance, possibly using peripheral vision.
Image readability
Considering that, due to space limitations, we tend to put reduced images in mind maps, it is critical for good reading and comprehension productivity to insert simple and direct images that preserve these characteristics when in small size. We will refer to these images as more or less readable.
Do a test of these statements: look at the figures below, purposely small, and see which ones you find most easily readable:
Note that these are images that you have already seen in larger size, which should make it easier for you to read, but it probably happened to you that it still took longer for some.
Now do the same readability test with new images:
The guideline
As we, mappers, are adepts and seekers of synthesis, there is nothing better than seeking to synthesize the ideas above. The overview takes the form of a guideline:
When illustrating a mind map, look for more readable images.
Note that we didn't say "Use" but "search for images", and we also didn't say "look for readable images" but "more readable". There is a foundation for this: finding the ideal image is not always easy; We try to be realistic, the fact that we seek does not mean that we will find. There will be times when we have to make do with what we have – if we have anything at all. But having a good criterion for image selection can increase the productivity of the illustration stage because we will have a filter to quickly eliminate many possibilities. And if you produce your own images, you'll also see your productivity increased because you'll tend to make simpler – but still meaningful – images when you apply the criterion.
Another possible representation of the guideline, visual, follows below. The images symbolize that a look implies greater reading productivity. By the way, the eye was taken from a photo of Gisèle Bundchen. Just as, of course, a mnemonic resource.
Cautions and exceptions
Flexibility
It may be good to remember that criteria and guidelines are not laws, and no one is obliged to apply them. There will be situations where it may be better to insert an image that impresses or the best option is to use a more complex image.
For example, in a descriptive mind map of books, in which the main illustrations are the covers of the books, inserting thumbnails of the covers will be a good choice.
In general, the desired effect/outcome will be the main reference, and feedback from experience will provide the best support for the choices made.
The first time is different
You have certainly walked in the dark; How does it achieve this? What capacity do we have to have to be able to walk without up-to-date information on the environment? The answer is that we use memories, images retrieved from previous perceptions of the place. If this continues as our memories, being guided by them will be easy; when there are new things on the way, we stumble.
Something similar occurs when we read an image. If we remember it accurately, we don't even need to look at it. If some detail is missing, we look enough to complete the mental replica of the image. Thus, the fact that an image is structured implies that the first time we will have to give it more looks, but the next time this may not be necessary.
