Attributes of an Effective Research Poster [this is 80 point font]
Angela Student (Montana Tech), Other Collaborator (Affiliation) and Faculty Mentor (Montana Tech) [48 point
font]
What Makes a Great Poster?
Hypothesis: Focused text and clear
figures with attractive layout and color
attract attention and convey ideas.
Is this a great
poster?
Attributes of the Best
Posters [66 pt font]
RESULTS
• Evaluated all 203 undergraduate posters in life
science, physical science, mathematics and
engineering at three different conferences in spring
2009.
Number of Posters
Conference
Life Science Physical Sci. Math & CS Engineering
Regional AMP
37
11
7
15
National HBCU-UP
52
17
16
21
Campus Summer
12
9
6
0
Total
101
37
29
36
Total
70
106
27
203
Number of Posters by field and conference
• Reviewers agreed on evaluations of 87% of posters
Background and Significance
• Research conferences display many
posters with too little time for the audience to
learn about more than a few.
• Understanding what makes a poster
effective can help presenters design posters
that attract attention and convey research
results.
• An impressive poster with knowledgeable
discussion can get the presenter recruited to
a job or grad school.
Methods
• Developed a poster evaluation scheme
using example posters
• Trained four poster reviewers and
"calibrated" evaluations by comparing
and discussing among raters.
• Every poster was reviewed independently
by at least two raters—both walk by and
discussion
• Compared and identified common
attributes of "best" and "worst" posters
• One idea, clearly presented [40 pt font]
• Important and interesting topic
• Big colorful graphics that are easy to
understand
• Logical, easy-to-follow layout: the most
important information is close to eye level
•Test your layout by printing onto 8.5x11
paper: is everything readable?
• No areas of dense text; Some "white space"
• Not "busy" with many styles, fonts
90
• Knowledgeable presenter
80
• Interested in questions
70
• Enthusiastic about the project
• Thinking further about the research and
where it could lead
60
50
East
West
North
40
• Interested in ideas of the audience.
Conclusions
30
20
• Our hypothesis was confirmed.
10
0
1st Qtr
2nd Qtr
3rd Qtr
4th Qtr
The most effective posters (light blue)
differed from the others by having
much more X and much less A, B, and Z
Poster raters spoke
with presenters
about their projects
for 3 to 4 minutes.
The most effective
presenters conveyed
their ideas well in
this brief time.
• We identified many more important
aspects of posters and poster
presentations than we expected
• Future work
• Expand study to humanities and other
fields
• Evaluate posters from faculty and
graduate students
• See if reviewers of different ages and
expertise have different results/ratings.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by NSF grant PHY23-45678. We
thank Marcus Daly, Betsy Ross, Chief Joseph, and Jeannette
Rankin for serving as poster reviewers.