It is definitely a challenge to create posters that catch people’s attention, look good, and actually communicate something useful. Having been to quite a few academic events, I have seen my fair share of posters. Some I loved, and others not so much. Most follow pretty standard themes, including the classic research flow from introduction through methods, results, discussion, and conclusion. I actually appreciate this structure. It is important, especially for budding researchers, to see and practice how research is conventionally communicated.

Many posters also rely on a striking visualisation to draw people in. I am all for this approach, but the problem is that some visuals are really field-dependent. For me, if I see a scatter plot or box plot, I immediately know it is not for me because that signals research that is typically outside my area.

So, for my poster on data physicalisation in youth mental health, I knew it would be an uphill battle. It is qualitative in nature, explores new and eccentric ideas, and the study is in its early stages. I knew I needed to lean on convention to give the work credibility and clarity, following the typical research flow to ground people in something familiar. But I also needed to do something visually different to bridge disciplinary divides and make the concept accessible. That is where the tiny, playful LED lights came in. They were directly relevant to the research, i.e., encoding data into physical objects, specifically daylight exposure data (important for mental health) represented through LED lights. More importantly, they acted as a bridge, something tangible and curious that could engage people who might not otherwise stop, creating an entry point into the work.

For fellow EMCRs presenting complex work visually, my advice is to start with your core message and build everything around that one idea. Do not try to fit your entire research on there. Think of it as a conversation starter, not a comprehensive document. Test your poster from two meters away, and if the main point is not immediately clear, simplify further. Do not underestimate the power of something interactive, even if simple. Giving people a reason to engage makes a huge difference.

Interestingly, the process genuinely helped me see my work in a different light. Having to condense everything and think about physical tangibility forced me to clarify what my research was really about at its core. Designing the LED demonstration made me reconsider the relationship between data, physicality, and meaning. It was not just about explaining my research, but it became part of the research itself.