The best graphical abstracts feel seamless and natural because they guide the viewer’s eye.
Just as we read one sentence after another, a well-designed graphical abstract delivers the right information at the right time.
What Clarity Looks Like
When it comes to arranging your content, it’s all about providing the reader’s eye with a clear path.
I chose these two graphical abstracts because they are rather minimalistic and therefore clearly outline different layouts. You can read the papers here and here.
If you see a “progression” in your narrative, you can use that. (For some inspiration, we discussed narratives in posters previously).
A horizontal (or vertical) setup gives you a natural outline for ordering your content.
Generally, horizontal layouts are more common and may be somewhat easier to digest. The graphical abstracts are from this and that paper.
However, we are sometimes not entirely free in our choices, as journal or conference guidelines usually prescribe a specific format.
Adapting To Different Formats
Unfortunately, we often have to adapt to a 1:1 format, which can be much more challenging.
And sometimes, there is no clear progressive outline that we can use - more like individual chunks of information.
The people from BioRender put together an outstanding webinar on graphical abstracts; they also discussed this example there. Although I would argue that the design could be further improved, you can clearly see how a rectangular layout can make visual guidance very difficult.
To deal with that, still think in terms of visual flow - where do you want your reader’s eyes to move?
This usually means top to bottom or left to right (in my opinion not the other way around despite especially bottom to top layouts can feel tempting).
My tip: To align your elements, use grids.
You can subdivide any format into smaller sections. This ensures you have a visual structure and clearly contrast different thematic parts.
Of course, you can do the very same for a 16:9 format or other layouts. On the far left, I didn’t draw the lines at full width to indicate that, while it could be three panels, there might instead be a guided flow of the eye from one element to the next - for example, showing what is done with a patient’s sample after it has been taken.
A Warning About Circular Designs
A 1:1 format, splitting a 16:9 format in half, or when writing reviews - circular designs can be very tempting.
Their main issue is that the eye doesn’t know where to start - and if there is additional information in the center, it may not even know where to end.
These are the graphical abstracts from this and that paper.
For this reason, I would generally advise against circular layouts.
If you cannot avoid it, consider whether some prioritization is possible (e.g., based on effectiveness, novelty, or relevance) or place a clear starting point on the left and a takeaway or general conclusion toward the right.
I like the idea of this graphical abstract because it gives the eye some direction. I think it would be relatively straightforward to improve it—for instance, by changing the color or transparency of the individual elements to highlight their role or effectiveness, or to outline their implications more clearly.
Visual Cues To Guide The Eye
There are some subtle design tricks you can use to guide the reader’s eye.
Spacing is one of them.
Our eyes are naturally drawn to elements that stand out - for example, those surrounded by more white space.
A small gap between two elements can signal a new step. For example, when outlining methods versus results, this can be a subtle cue that still saves space.
Another example from the BioRender webinar. As you may have noticed in the previous graphical abstract, make sure to align all elements properly. However, where appropriate, vary distances to indicate relationships.
Grouping is another powerful cue.
The closer two elements are to each other, the more likely our brain is to perceive them as belonging together.
While the example on the far right is quite clear, if you look at the one in the middle, it is really the smaller left-to-right distance compared with the bottom-to-top distance that makes the brain group the elements into stacks. The theory behind this is described by Gestalt theory (in case you want to dive deeper).
While you can use this to guide the eye, take care, as it can influence how readers interpret relationships between items.
Ordering Elements Properly
Once you have a general layout, give the placement of individual elements a second thought. You want to provide the right information at the right time.
This is clearly a very confusing design, making it difficult to follow what is happening.
Therefore, what is most important for understanding your work should come first - usually top or left - whether it's an element, label or chemical group.
If a crucial piece of information is missed early on, the eyes may start jumping around.
If you have multiple important aspects to show, you can prevent jumping by using visual separators such as boxes or arrows.
Tips On How To Approach It
Take enough time to think about the layout, and don’t hesitate to sketch drafts.
Choosing the wrong layout will lead to endless editing and rearranging.
When drafting your layout, think about which relationships or processes you want to illustrate, but also consider where you’ll place your labels (shown by the red lines), as you may have significantly more space available in one direction than another.
And once you think you’ve found a good option, take a step back. It’s easy to get lost in details, so literally zoom out - and observe where your eyes go first.
Zooming out helps you catch subtle issues, such as elements being positioned higher than their starting point (see the graphical abstract on the left).
When you begin in the upper-left corner, your eye can be distracted by the end of a loop that sits higher than the previous point.
Still, finding a good layout is not always easy. But don’t let this get to you.
Adding too many elements such as arrows, colors, boxes, or spacing creates excessive visual pressure.
The goal is to guide the eye clearly, but subtly. Often, one or at most two guiding elements are enough.
How We Feel Today
Convince yourself that this is a fever dream — I mean, a graphical abstract.
What's a Society Journal? Hi Reader, let’s talk about something that has been essential to the development of the scientific system. They published the first scientific journal ever (despite it being far different from what we call a journal today). I am sure many scientists have even published in “them” without realizing it - I am referring to Society Journals. I bring this up because they might represent one of the best antidotes to predatory publishing and the larger issue of publication...
What's the Right Journal? Hi Reader, where do you normally publish your papers? But why exactly there? It remains one of the most important decisions for your career. If you’re unsure where to publish or if you’re considering switching journals, how do you find a good fit? Here is a pragmatic 7-step framework that should help you make a decision: Step 0 – Build an Initial List First, create a list of potential journals. While several will be top of mind, consider including those that you...
What Makes a Journal? Hi Reader, how many active, peer-reviewed academic journals exist today? There are 40,000! And are you interested in how many papers they publish every day? So, how can you know which journal to publish in? Today, we will discuss five key features of journals to help you differentiate them: What Differentiates Journals With so many journals available, it is easy to think that they differ only by name or impact factor. Click to enlarge. Please take these numbers with a...
