Complex topics visually decoded: a multimodal perspective on infographics in knowledge transfer between experts and laypeople

2.1 Analysis material

Given the increasing fragmentation of knowledge within popular science texts, it is often no longer feasible to establish clear-cut source–target text relationships, as references to the original scientific sources are frequently absent or only vaguely indicated. In light of this methodological challenge, the present study centers on climate change communication. This focus not only reflects a pressing and socially relevant contemporary issue, but also offers a key analytical advantage: the availability of a prominent international reference institution, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The IPCC provides terminology-bound knowledge in the form of comprehensive glossaries and precise explanations (e.g. GIEC 2021), which enabled a systematic identification and validation of the specialized knowledge embedded in the infographics prior to the analysis, as well as its classification within established scientific concepts and knowledge frameworks.

The infographics selected as examples for this analysis were published by the Institut national des sciences de l’Univers (INSU), a renowned French research institution that conducts research in the field of climate science, among others (cf. INSU 2022a). The INSU operates under the authority of the French national research institution Centre national de la recherche scientifique (CNRS), which is actively involved in science communication in order to prevent the spread of misinformation (cf. INSU 2022b).

Motivated by this aim, a collaboration in 2021 between the media platform and blogger Bon Pote^[1] and the graphic design agency Méduse Communication resulted in the production of 20 infographics, which were published in a section on the website of the INSU. These infographics were specifically designed to counter widespread misconceptions about climate change within the French public sphere. As such, they provide a valuable basis for analysis, as they explicitly target a broader, non-specialist audience, build on clearly defined scientific terminology, and thereby exemplify the process through which expert scientific knowledge is transformed into a general-language, visually supported mode of public discourse.

For the analysis, three infographics (see Figure 1) were selected as examples: Le climat a-t-il vraiment toujours changé? [ʻHas the climate really always changed?ʼ] (I1), published on February 25, 2021; CO ₂ & changement climatique [ʻCO ₂ & climate changeʼ] (I2), published on March 18, 2021; and Météo & climat, comment ne plus les confondre? [ʻWeather & climate, how to avoid confusing them?ʼ] (I3), published on April 22, 2021.^[2] These infographics were chosen based on their thematic focus, as they address core concepts of climate change and articulate fundamental distinctions relevant to public debate – such as the difference between weather and climate or between natural and anthropogenic causes of climate change. In addition, the infographics display a high degree of structural and conceptual similarity, allowing for comparative insights into the underlying techniques of knowledge transfer and the interplay of various modes involved in communicating scientific knowledge to the public.

Figure 1:

QR codes directing to the infographics examined in the analysis.

2.2 Infographics in the context of multimodal communication

The genre of the infographic originated in the field of data visualization, which explains its primary emphasis on the visual mode. Initially, infographics were mainly used to present complex datasets in a simplified and accessible manner. Over time, however, the format evolved into an integrative medium that combines multiple modes of communication (for a historical account of the infographic, see Dick 2020).

The communication of knowledge in infographics takes place through the interaction of various semiotic resources, referred to as modes (cf. Kress and van Leeuwen 2001: 2). Bateman et al. (2017: 289) define infographics as a “composite semiotic mode that integrates contributions from other semiotic modes.ˮ They also emphasize that these modes cannot be reduced to sensory channels or conceived as fixed, clearly delineated units. Rather, modes must be examined in relation to their specific communicative contexts (cf. Bateman et al. 2017: 17–19).^[3] According to Stöckl, text-specific combinations of intermodal relations – such as additive, complementary, hierarchical, divergent, or conflictive – can be identified depending on the communicative product’s form and the author’s intention (cf. Stöckl 2006: 28). Furthermore, a particular feature of the infographic is its ability to incorporate more ‘traditional’ forms of information visualization – such as diagrams, timelines, tables, and charts – together with textual elements into a coherent multimodal text. In this regard, Peschke (2019) functionally categorizes the visual resources of infographics into four main types, which – following Bateman et al. (2017) – can be understood as specified forms of expression within the visual mode: images (high iconicity), schematic images (abstract representations), logical images (relational representations) and visual analogies (with metaphorical references) (cf. Peschke 2019: 78–116). This classification will guide the subsequent analysis.

A few words also need to be said about the spatial organization of information in infographics: they are particularly characterized by a high density of information while maintaining a deliberately limited length. Following standard design guidelines, it is recommended that infographics span no more than one or two pages to ensure clarity and user-friendliness (cf. Dunlap and Lowenthal 2016: 55). This information density is mitigated through a modular arrangement, where thematically and graphically distinct units replace traditional long text (cf. Schröder 2010: 181). This modular structure results in a non-linear information consumption, called “delinearization” (Bucher 2011: 125), which is closely tied to the concept of multimodality. This allows for a flexible, user-centered approach to accessing information, enabling users to navigate the individual modules in a non-sequential manner.

To facilitate the subsequent analysis of the examples in relation to the research question, Stöckl’s model of multimodal text type analysis is adopted as a guiding framework. This model emphasizes several analytical dimensions: structure and delimitation, actional and thematic structure, multimodal interconnections, and intertextuality (cf. Stöckl 2016: 22–25). First, Stöckl suggests an examination of (1) structure and demarcation – that is, the visual organization, spatial segmentation, and formal separation or arrangement of the various semiotic resources. This is followed by an analysis of the infographic’s (2) thematic structure and (3) action structure, which also includes its communicative orientation (informative, appellative, argumentative, or narrative). The next step involves analyzing (4) the multimodal connections and interrelations between the involved semiotic modes. Finally, (5) intertextuality is examined, which in this analysis is approached primarily through the identification of semantic isotopies.

2.3 Infographics in knowledge transfer between experts and laypersons

Next is a brief overview of the technical language features that become relevant when analyzing knowledge transfer with the help of infographics, as the primary cause of the difficulties in knowledge transfer lies in the peculiarities of the technical language used in intra-specialist communication. Specialist languages are defined here as „Erscheinungsformen der Sprache, die zur begrifflichen Erfassung und zur Darstellung fachspezifischer Sachverhalte und Gegenstände sowie zur Verständigung über diese Sachverhalte und Gegenstände […] dienen“ [ʻmanifestations of language that serve to conceptualize and represent subject-specific facts and objects, as well as to communicate about these facts and objectsʼ] (Niederhauser 1999: 23–24). These languages are used whenever absolute precision is essential in specialist discussions between experts (cf. Atayan et al. 2015: 412). The most prominent feature, and one of particular importance for knowledge transfer, is the specialized lexicon found in technical texts. A technical term is defined as „die kleinste bedeutungstragende und zugleich frei verwendbare sprachliche Einheit eines fachlichen Sprachsystems […]“ [ʻthe smallest meaning-bearing and at the same time freely usable linguistic unit of a technical language systemʼ] (Roelcke 2010: 56), and it is intrinsically linked to the specialized knowledge of a given discipline (cf. Jahr 2009: 84). Functionally, technical terms facilitate efficient communication among experts within the same field by possessing certain characteristic features, such as subject-relatedness, clear definition, systematicity, precision, unambiguity, and referentiality (cf. Kalverkämper 1988: 166).

For the transfer of knowledge between experts and laypeople, the popularization of content is commonly employed. This refers to “the transformation of specialized knowledge into ‘everyday’ or ‘lay’ knowledge, as well as a recontextualization of scientific discourse, for instance, in the realm of the public discourses of the mass media or other institutions” (Calsamiglia and van Dijk 2004: 370). The central goal of popularization is to make the state of scientific research and its current findings accessible to audiences outside the expert community, thereby fostering their interest through accessible and concise texts (cf. Reinart and Pöckl 2015: 144). Although it has become increasingly common in recent years for scientists to act as agents of popularization themselves, the present case reflects a more traditional division of labor, characterized by clearly separated roles between experts and popularizers (cf. Reinart and Pöckl 2015: 145–146). In the specific examples analyzed, the experts of the INSU are not directly involved in the dissemination of their findings; instead, this task is delegated to professional popularizers, namely Bon Pote and Méduse Communication. Particularly within this collaborative constellation, it becomes clear that the dichotomy between experts and non-experts – often treated as a given – must instead be understood as something actively constructed. Formats such as infographics play a key role in shaping and negotiating these epistemic roles. As Visser (2018: 98) argues, epistemic positions are not simply assumed but are discursively produced. Knowledge transfer, then, is not merely a matter of transmitting information; it is also a process through which epistemic roles are assigned, negotiated, and stabilized.

When knowledge is transferred from an original text to a target text, almost all linguistic features of the original text type are altered and not directly reproduced. Since conventions of specialist texts are typically unfamiliar to the lay audience, the popularizer is not bound by these conventions and can adapt the form of communication to the needs of the target audience (cf. Niederhauser 1997: 115–116). As a result, it is not uncommon for the original text to be transformed into an entirely new text type – such as a descriptive, explanatory, argumentative, or narrative focus (cf. Brinker et al. 2024: 63). In terms of content, this results in textual modifications and a simplification of the popularized material (cf. Reinart and Pöckl 2015: 148).

Overall, the transfer of knowledge between experts and laypeople is not a straightforward, linear process of information transmission. Rather, knowledge is modified, restructured, and tailored to the specific context of the transfer (cf. Beckers 2012: 96–97). Since knowledge can exist in various forms and is inherently dynamic (cf. Polanyi 2009; Tulving 1972; Weber 2009), when a transfer process is initiated, the knowledge is reorganized or adapted to the knowledge structures, as well as the motivational and cognitive prerequisites of the recipients (cf. Antos 2001: 26). Therefore, whenever the term “knowledge transfer” is used in the following, it always carries this dimension of meaning.

3.1 The multimodal structure

The analysis of the infographics reveals the following macro-structural elements: each infographic is hierarchically organized, featuring a title and, optionally, a subtitle. These are followed by individual modules comprising text-image combinations, each introduced by a subheading. The number of modules within the main body of the infographic varies but is always greater than one (I1, I2, I3). The modules are visually unified, distinguished only by their respective subheadings, and adhere to a linear reading flow, proceeding from left to right and top to bottom. This sequential arrangement ensures that the topic or question presented in the title is fully comprehensible only when the prescribed reading order is followed. Consequently, the structure of the infographics exhibits a high degree of definition, allowing little flexibility in the order of reception.

The color scheme is dominated by black, light blue, pink, and yellow. Text elements are predominantly rendered in black, while the title appears in pink with a black shadow. The subheadings are highlighted by a yellow shadow. Additional text highlights are marked in light blue or yellow. The visual illustrations align with this color scheme, combining black, light blue, yellow, and pink to achieve a harmonious and consistent design. Stylistically, the infographics draw inspiration from sketch notes, characterized by handwritten-style typography, text highlights resembling highlighter usage, and simple illustrations. This design choice evokes the impression of hand-annotated text. However, unlike traditional sketch notes, which are typically created for personal use (cf. Dimeo 2016: 10), the classification of these infographics as a specific text format can be derived primarily from their public media dissemination through the INSU.

The carefully designed multimodal composition, integrating verbal and non-verbal elements, enhances coherence and enables readers to perceive the infographics as cohesive and unified formats. The macrostructure of the infographics does not mirror a scientific text in a one-to-one manner; instead, it is adapted to meet the needs of the target audience and simplified significantly. This adaptation involves the reorganization and reconfiguration of information, with the degree of detail deliberately adjusted. This reduction of complexity is a defining feature of the popularization of scientific content, as evident in the altered macrostructure (cf. Niederhauser 1999: 120–121).

The identification of a clearly defined target audience must remain open at this point, due to a lack of explicit indications from the INSU. However, the thematic focus on countering misconceptions and myths surrounding climate change suggests that the infographics are intended to address a broad and heterogeneous audience. This intention is further supported by the structural organization of the infographics, which aims to maximize reach and communicative accessibility while simultaneously reducing complexity.

3.2 Actional and thematic structure

Building upon the identification of multimodal elements that define the typical form of infographics, this section examines the actional and thematic structure of the individual infographics. In all instances, the discrete actions – referred to as “stages” by Stöckl (2016: 26) – are manifested across various modalities. Given the constraints of this paper, a comprehensive enumeration of every element contributing to the actional structure is impractical; therefore, only the most salient components will be mentioned below.

For instance, the headline serves to announce the thematic orientation of the infographic:

The following subheadings of the individual sections and modules indicate the specific thematic focus of the individual modules. This could look as follows, as an example for I1:

The last subheading in (4), titled Le mot de la fin [ʻThe final wordʼ], introduces the concluding remarks, and is further emphasized by a black line at the end, signaling the infographic’s closure. In the analyzed infographics, modules corresponding to these subheadings predominantly present an explicative development of the announced topics. Accompanying images and illustrations serve to illustrate, explain, narrate, and occasionally evaluate or comment on the content. For instance, in I3, various semiotic resources (for a detailed discussion of intermodal relations, see Section 3.3.2) such as thermometers and weather pictograms are used to visually represent abstract concepts like “climate” and “weather”. Stylized scales add explanatory depth to these concepts, while comic-style figures not only introduce a narrative dimension but also serve to comment on or evaluate the content through their association with verbal elements (e.g. I2, I3).

From a structural perspective, some multimodal elements are intended to direct the reader’s attention to specific sections, highlight particular content, and encourage engagement. For example, in I3, within the module titled Climat et météo: de quoi parlons-nous? [ʻClimate and weather: what are we talking about?ʼ], key definitions are enclosed in pink boxes, underscoring their significance. These salience markers are always located in the modality of the image and represent one of the strengths of infographics. They guide the audience’s focus according to salience principles (see e.g., Itti and Koch 2000: 1501–1502) during the reception process, thereby facilitating successful knowledge transfer. The actual effectiveness of this technique – as in other instances – cannot be assessed at this point, as such an evaluation would necessitate a reception-oriented approach beyond the scope of the current analysis.

Thus, the infographics present a „spezifische Matrix funktionaler Abschnitte“ [ʻspecific matrix of functional sectionsʼ] (Stöckl 2016: 26). Regarding the thematic structure, the infographics predominantly exhibit an explicative thematic development, in line with their function of conveying information. However, they may also incorporate narrative and argumentative elements. The explicative development primarily occurs through a complementary integration of text and image modalities to clarify concepts and terms (further discussed in the following chapter). In this context, the explanandum is realized thematically through the title or subheading, while the explanans is conveyed through the text-image relations within the corresponding module.

An analysis of the actional and thematic structure reveals that these are “integrative” across the different modes (see also Stöckl 2016: 22), and that the individual modules of the infographics are realized by linking the modes of text and image. Additionally, the structural elements indicate that the text has transitioned away from its original scientific nature (cf. Hepp 2022: 46). In choosing the appropriate format for the popularized content, this signifies a shift in text type – specifically, the adaptation of the original specialized text into the infographic format in response to the altered communication context. The mode of communication has shifted from intra- or interdisciplinary exchange to a clearly vertical structure, mediated by the popularizing agents Bon Pote and Méduse Communication, who operate at the interface between scientific expertise and public discourse.

3.3 Explication of specialist knowledge

Specialist knowledge plays a crucial role in climate communication, particularly through the use of the specialized lexicon of climate science. Popularizers commonly employ various techniques to make expert knowledge accessible to lay audiences. The following analysis initially focuses on the purely verbal level and is later expanded to address intersemiotic relationships between modalities, as discussed in the next chapter.