Assessing the efficacy of visual contracts: an empirical study of transaction costs

ABSTRACT Visual contracts have attracted increasing attention as a human-focused approach to contract law, with proponents arguing they are a better way to effectively communicate complex terms and conditions. However, there have been only limited empirical studies of the efficacy of these contracts. This paper compares and evaluates data of responses to text and visual contracts from two large Australian companies. Drawing on theories of transaction cost economics, we undertook an empirical study of ordinary least square (OLS) regressions to examine the effectiveness of visual contracts in comparison with traditional text-based contracts. Analysis of the results demonstrates that the visual format plays a significant role in reducing the transaction costs of contracting, providing empirical confirmation of the value of contract redesign and the visual format.


I. Introduction
There is a burgeoning number of advocates for changing our traditional approach to text-based contracts. There is widespread acknowledgement that as we go about our daily lives, we are faced with an ever-increasing number of terms and conditions. As Bakos, Marotta-Wurgler, and Trossen (2014) and Obar and Oeldorf-Hirsch (2018) have convincingly demonstrated, the vast majority of people cannot, and will not, read or understand the majority of standard form contracts that they encounter. These studies focused on online terms of service, however similar considerations apply to other day-to-day contracts, for example, opening a bank account or signing a contract of employment. As Vitasek argues, the 'fine print' is complex, confusing and full of jargon, and is capable of confounding even people with high levels of intelligence and literacy. (Vitasek 2017) Similarly, Haapio and Passera observe, conventional written contracts 'do not support cognitively-overloaded, busy readers in searching, integrating, and understanding the information they contain'. (Passera, Kankaanranta, and Louhiala-Salminen 2017;Passera 2021 Haapio andPassera 2021).
In response, fields of legal design and visual law have emerged to try and make contracts more accessible, and to remove unnecessary complexity. (Andersen 2018;Toohey et al. 2019). For example, the use of icons alongside text have been used to help explain privacy principles (Rossi and Palmirani 2019), contractual terms and conditions (Sikoryak 2017), visual pattern libraries developed to enhance contracts (Haapio, Hagan, et al. 2016), and many more innovations (Allbon 2018). One such innovation is the comic format. Building on the work of De Rooy (2018) Andersen has been one of the pioneers in the field of comic book contracts, which make contracts short and readable by using a combination of comic book pictures with text explanations. (Keating and Andersen 2016;Andersen 2020).
In the face of growing enthusiasm for visual contracts, there is also a need to assess and validate the efficacy of less textual approaches to contracting. While visual approaches are well received, both intuitively and anecdotally, there has been only very limited examination of their efficacy to date. Existing studies, though valuable, leave a great number of questions unanswered.
Evaluation by de Rooy of his comic contracts of employment were shown to have observable benefits. Created primarily for seasonal fruit pickers with low levels of literacy, de Rooy found that the comic approach not only enhanced the employee's positive perceptions of their employer, and thereby improved workplace relations, but also had other tangible benefits. The most concrete benefits reported by de Rooy included a dramatic reduction of average onboarding time for workers, down from 4 hours to 40 minutes, and an elimination of contractual disputes. (De Rooy 2019). However, a significant limitation of de Rooy's case study is the limited data, which has to date not been published. Despite this, the success of de Rooy's project is well documented.
In contrast, Passera undertook a major visual impact study for the International Association for Contract and Commercial Management (hereinafter referred to as IACCM) with the data and analysis forming part of a doctoral dissertation. In a simulated environment, 124 IACCM members from 24 countries were provided with a contract, either in a traditional text only format, or a visually enriched version. They were asked to answer six questions to test their comprehension. Several additional questions were asked to assess the perceived difficulty of the task, and their user experience in relation to each type of contract. The experiment assessed how well participants understood the contract by measuring their speed and accuracy in answering a series of comprehension tasks. The research participants were divided into two groups, one using the traditional, text-only version of the contract, and the other a visually enhanced version. The wording and structure of both versions remained the same to ensure comparability. User experience was also assessed using the HED/UT scale, which 'captures user perceptions of utilitarian and hedonic value in interacting with a design'. (Passera 2018, 24).
Using the visual version of the contract, the participants, on average, replied more accurately and faster than those using the text based version. Differences in accuracy and speed between the two groups were statistically significant, suggesting that the visual display of contractual information has a positive effect on comprehension. (Passera 2017, 129-130, 132, 208) Similarly, visual contracts tested significantly above text-based contracts on the HED/UT analysis, in terms of their helpfulness, functionality, practicality and enjoyment of use. While Passera's ground-breaking study provides a robust endorsement of the benefits of visual contracts, the experiment was conducted in a controlled environment, and was undertaken using contract experts (IACCM Members) as subjects, and the results provide limited proof-of-concept in realworld environments for typical users of everyday contracts.

The Study
We therefore sought to create a real-world study to further evaluate the efficacy of visual contracts. In particular, we focussed on their impact on individuals who are not experts in the subject matter of the contract. We adopted a Transaction Cost Economics (TCE) approach to contribute the body of empirical analysis on the utility of visual contracts, as TCE focuses on seeking efficient contracting based on a cost-benefit ratio.
Our dataset is derived from extensive quantitative data (n = 451) from real world users in two common, non-expert, contracting situationsfirstly a contract of employment, and secondly, a banking contract. Each contract was produced by Andersen, and informed by principles of legal design thinking and visual law, adopting a comic contract format. The contract of employment was created for use by Aurecon, an international engineering consultancy firm with over 5,000 employees, and rolled out for non-executive employees across several countries, including Australia, New Zealand and the Philippines. 1 Illustration 1 below provides the reader with a sense of the visual contract demonstrating the simplified approach and engaging use of visual elements. (Figure 1.) The banking contract is a product schedule for a standard customer account for Bankwest, an Australian full-service bank based in Perth, Western Australia. 2 The product schedule, which provides the critical terms and conditions of the contract between bank and customer, is traditionally glossed over by customers and seldom read. The visual contract devised for Bankwest adopts an engaging visual approach in order to address this typical lack of engagement. Figure 2 below provides an illustration of the contract.
The creation of a visual contract does not simply involve replacing text with images, not does it involve transferring existing text into a new format alongside images. Rather, a visual contract is the output of a user-focussed legal design process, in which all aspects of the contract are redesigned to meet user needs, and in which visual elements are used to contribute to the functionality of the contract. As part of the redesign process, text is revised and made more readable, and combined with visual elements. Therefore, the study evaluates the efficiency of visual contracts as a whole, rather than the efficiency of just the visual elements per se.
It is also worth emphasizing that these are 'visual contracts' in which the visual elements form part of the contract, rather than 'contracts with visuals' in which the visual elements are just for decorative effect. As one Australian judge has commented extracurially, the is no legal obstacle to visual elements forming a binding component of the contract, provided they can be interpreted and a meaning ascertained. (French 2019) In fact, visual elements such as graphs, tables and diagrams are commonplace in the commercial world to assist in understanding of critical business information.
We provide further details about the datasets from evaluation of these contracts in Part II below. As explained below, the Transaction Cost Theory approach is deployed to comparatively assess the perceived benefits of a visual contract in comparison with conventional text-based contracts. The study found convincing advantages to the use of a visual contract approach.

Transaction cost theory -assessing the utility of visual contracts
The theoretical framework used in this paper is that of Transaction Cost Economics. Transaction Cost  Economics is especially important in relation to contracts, because it highlights the impact of previously overlooked choices in assessing efficiency. Neoclassical economics is particularly focussed on the role of price mechanisms, assuming this to be the critical signal for organizing market transactions. As Coase (1960) observed, however, the pricing system was inadequate to coordinate markets, due to the impact of transaction costs. Transaction Cost Economics was developed to better explain the range of factors impacting party choice in a given circumstance. It has been strongly influential in the fields of law and economics. As Williamson observes, 'Transaction cost economics joins aspects of law, economics, and organization theory in an effort to deepen organizational insights and develop refutable implications'. (Williamson 1984, 195-196).
Coase's definition of transaction costs was readily criticized as being 'brief and cryptic' (Barzel and Kochin, 1992, p. 25) Coase defines them as follows: 'In order to carry out a market transaction it is necessary to discover who it is that one wishes to deal with, to inform people that one wishes to deal and on what terms, to conduct negotiations leading up to a bargain, to draw up the contract, to undertake the inspection needed to make sure that the terms of the contract are being observed, and so on'. (Coase 1960, 15). Williamson (1975Williamson ( , 1985Williamson ( , 1996Williamson ( , 1995 refined the field's understanding of transaction costs, identifying factors such as search costs, information costs, bargaining costs, decision costs, supervision costs and costs of default. Particular transaction costs are of variable importance at different stages of the contract -for example, factors such as information costs and negotiation costs are of greatest relevance at the pre-contract stage. Transaction costs impacting the post-contract period include costs of complying with the terms of the contract, default costs and enforcement costs. Williamson noted that transaction costs are primarily concerned with human nature, stating that '[a] t least three attributes of human nature are important to the study of economics of process: cognitive competence, motivation, and self-regard'. (Williamson 1985, 197).
An extensive body of literature then examined the transaction costs associated with particular varieties of contract, as well as the attributes of the clauses within the contract, for example, Cheung (1969). Until recently, however, remarkably little attention has been paid to the design choices made in the contract's presentation, such as the choice of plain English drafting over heavy legalese, the contract's layout, verbosity, or the manner of presentation. However, attention is now being given to these features as important aspects of transaction cost, such as the work presented in this article. As Passera et al (2016) explain, 'the assumption [of transaction cost economics] is that as long as contracts contain appropriate safeguards, they will succeed in regulating transactions. Communication between parties, in person or through contracts, is not a concern'. This article seeks to fill that lacuna in the literature. As scholars and practitioners working in the field of legal design, and having observed the positive impact of visual contracts, it seemed illogical that features of the contract such as its format could not be materially relevant to transaction cost. Additionally, a transaction cost focus is a credible and effective way to assess whether visual contracts are more effective than their text-based counterparts. Our conclusions, as we set out below, demonstrate that not only do format and communication strategy impact transaction costs, but that visual contracts are in fact a more effective, efficient alternative to traditional text-based contracts. At the outset, it should be noted that this study is concerned with standard-form contracts, which are not subject to negotiation between the partiesrather they are presented to the customer or employee, who is expected to either agree to or reject the terms as-is.

II. empirical model design, data & variables
Our project comprises of data sets, one from a contract of employment, and the other a banking contract. Each shares the same set of variables, with only minor modifications used in the survey to account for the differences between contract types, as per Table 1 below. Consistent with previous research, surveys were created to elicit the subject's understanding of three primary dimensions: • Comprehension -namely, how well the client or employee felt they understood the contract; • Engagement -namely, the extent to which the client or employ felt engaged with the contract, and the extent to which they actually read it; and • Perception -namely, what impact the contract has on the client or employee's perception of the company issuing the contract.
Data for the project was collected across a two and a half year period. This included six months of collecting data from Aurecon employees using the text-based versions of the employment contract, and two years of collecting data using the visual contract in a comic form containing images and text. 3 Aurecon is an engineering, design and advisory global company with locations in about 20 countries all over the world. During the survey period, the Aurecon contract was used for nonexecutive employees across the organization classified at level 7 and below. Feedback was then gathered from a survey of employees, with a total of 282 respondents. Data was also collected from Bankwest, one of Australia's largest banks. There were a total of 169 respondents with different contract formats, the text-based versions and comic book contract versions were presented separately. The Bankwest contract contained terms and conditions (product schedule) for individual consumers and small businesses/sole traders opening standard consumer banking accounts.

Model
Based on the cross-sectional data sets, via the method of the ordinary least square (OLS) regression, we have established two regression models between the comic book contract format and the transaction cost. The regression model equations are: Where X i is the independent variable (IV), referring to the use of either the comic book contract format or text contract format, with a value of 1 for the comic book contract and 0 for the text contract; Y i is the dependent variable (DV), which measures the transaction cost using ten proxy variables from different perspectives of the transaction cost measurement (Y1,Y2,Y3,Y4,Y5,Y6,Y7,Y8,Y9 and Y10); Controls is a control variable (CV) group of factors which may influence the 'Y i ' proxy variables, including gender, age, Y1,Y2,Y3,Y6,Y7,Y8,Y9 and Y10; β 1 is the impact level of X i to Y i , with a positive coefficient meaning positive impact, and a negative coefficient meaning negative impact; the absolute value of the coefficient indicates the quantitative level of the impact; β 0 is a constant and εi is the error term. Our focus parameter is β 1; which represents the estimated impact of the comic book contract format on the transaction cost.
In both equations, Y1,Y2,Y3,Y4,Y5, Y6, Y7, Y8, Y9, Y10 measured transaction cost across ten measures of contracting and enforcement costs (Williamson 1975(Williamson , 1985, which usually occur during and after the transaction. Y1 (Understanding), Y2 (Enjoyment), Y3 (Apprehension), Y4 (Presentation), Y5 (Understandable), Y7 (Explainability) and Y8 (Manageability) are People's behaviour of interaction from the dimensions (comprehension, engagement and perception) with the contract format is the core of this influencing mechanism for the selected measurements to the transaction cost. Details of these measures are set out in Tables 1 and 2 below. Y i (i = 1-10) are all measured on a Likert scale, where 1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Agree, and 5 = Strongly Agree. For the gender variables, 1 = Male, 2 = Female. For the age variables,1 = 18 to 25, 2 = 26 to 35, 3 = 36 to 45, 4 = 46 to 49, and 5 = 50+. We compared two groups (Aurecon and Bankwest) of contracts, the visual/comic and the text based, so it is a between-subject design. The respondents with different contract formats are from different levels of the companies, reflecting the socioeconomic diversity within society, and we compared the two groups with the same demo-graphic information with the condition of same company, which stand for the potential difference of the individual attributes related with this model is in very low level and the randomization works in this model.

Data
The following tables (Tables 2 and 3) show the variable descriptive statistics. The value range of the variables is not wide.

III. Results and discussion
As explained above, our evaluation examined two types of visual contract, the Aurecon employment contract, and the Bankwest product schedule, in each case examining Y1 to Y10 representing different aspects of comprehension, engagement and perception. The same survey instrument was administered in each study, and each set of data was analysed in the manner set out above.

Findings and analysis: employment contract
This section reports on empirical findings from the Aurecon contract. As indicated in our methodology, we present a three-part analysis. The first part tested the relationship between all the measurements of transaction cost with the comic book contract with the full samples but no control variables, then controlled gender and age. The second part tested the comic book contract's relationship with Y9. As Y1, Y2, Y7, Y8, and Y10 will have impact on Y9, Y1, Y2, Y7, Y8, and Y10 were chosen as control variables, then controlled gender and age as well. The third part tested the relationship between Y10 and the comic book contract format. As Y1, Y3, Y6, Y7, Y8, Y9 will have impact on Y10, we chose Y1, Y3, Y6, Y7, Y8, Y9 as the control variables, after that, introduced gender and age as additional control variables. The second part and the third part are also the robustness tests.

The model main regression with full samples
The following table (Table 4) reports the results of the model equation (1) full samples main regressions: • Column (1) is the regression between Y1 (Understanding) and X comic book contract or not. • Column (2) is the regression between Y2 (Enjoyment) and X comic book contract or not. • Column (3) is the regression between Y3 (Apprehension) and X comic book contract or not. • Column (4) is the regression between Y4 (Presentation) and X comic book contract or not.
• Column (5) is the regression between Y5 (Understandable) and X comic book contract or not. • Column (6) is the regression between Y6 (Reputation) and X comic book contract or not. • Column (7) is the regression between Y7 (Explainability) and X comic book contract or not. • Column (8) is the regression between Y8 (Manageability) and X comic book contract or not. • Column (9) is the regression between Y9 (Recommendable) and X comic book contract or not. • Column (10) is the regression between Y10 (Valued) and X comic book contract or not. Table 4 outlines the main regression results, with asterisks (*) signifying a positive and significant result. One asterisk (*) indicates significance of 10%, two asterisks (**) indicates significance of 5%, and three asterisks (***) indicates significance of 1%. As Table 4 illustrates, all coefficients from Y1 to Y10 are positive, indicating a positive result. With the exception of Y1, all measures are significant at the 1% level. Variable Y3 (apprehension) demonstrates some apprehension caused by the contract format, which we believe is an understandable reaction to the fact that the comic contract is so significantly different to what respondents would ordinarily expect. However, with a coefficient of 0.337, the level of apprehension is minimal, and does not undermine the positive impact of the other variables (Y1, Y2, Y4, Y5, Y6, Y7, Y8, Y9, Y10).
As Table 5 reports the same results concerning the relation between X and Y if we add gender and age as control variables in the regressions. t statistics in parentheses, R 2 _ a is the adjusted robust standard errors, the below is same. *p < 0.1, ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01.
The following table (Table 6A) reports the results after we add gender and age as two more control variables basing on Table 6.
Per Tables 6 and Table 6-A , we introduced control variables and tested the relationship between X and Y again, with the result remaining significant. These regressions also serve as a test of the robustness of the result.

The model Y10 regression
The following table (Table 7) reports the results of the Model Equation (2). As Y1, Y3, Y6, Y7, Y8, and Y9 have an impact upon Y10, we used Y1, Y3, Y6, Y7, Y8, and Y9 as control variables. After adding the control variables and testing the relationship between X and Y once again, the result remained strongly positive. As such, this regression acts as another robustness test. The following table (Table 7A) reports the results after introducing gender and age as another two control variables to the data presented in Table  7. All the coefficients stayed positive, and in three regressions, X comic book contract or not was significant at the 1% level and the 5% level respectively.
In summary, the study of the Aurecon employment contract used 282 samples with robustness tests. The Stata OLS regressions detailed above all demonstrate significant positive results. From this, we can conclude that the format of the visual comic book contract may significantly reduce transaction costs. Our analysis suggests that the reduction in transaction costs is derived from the fact that a Note: t statistics in parentheses, R 2 _ a is the adjusted robust standard errors, the below is same. *p < 0.1, ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01. Note: t statistics in parentheses, R 2 _ a is the adjusted robust standard errors, the below is same. *p < 0.1, ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01. Note: t statistics in parentheses, R 2 _ a is the adjusted robust standard errors, the below is same. *p < 0.1, ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01.
visual contract more clearly communicates the obligations of all parties, makes the format more comprehensible, and offers increased enjoyment of the process of digesting the contract. With pictures and information, and presented in manageable sections, critical details are much easier to understand, with the additional benefit of conveying a positive impression of the employer -specifically, their openness and transparency. We hypothesize that not only does the more relatable format enhance trust (Dyer and Chu 2003), it also makes the offeree feel valued by the organization (White 2015;Hamrick and White 2020). This not only enhances staff/customer retention, but, according to the insights of Goleman, Boyatzis, and McKee (2013) on psychological state and conflict, reduces the risk of disputes. This compounds the dispute-avoidant effect of better comprehension of contractual obligations.

Findings and analysis: banking contract
There were three parts to this empirical study of the Bankwest product schedule. The first part tested the relationship between all the measurements of transaction cost with the comic book contract, using the full samples but no control variables.
The third part tested the relationship between Y5 and the comic book contract format. Here, as Y1, Y2, Y6, Y7, Y8, Y9, and Y10 impact Y5, we chose Y1, Y2, Y6, Y7, Y8, Y9, and Y10 as control variables. The second part and the third part are once again robustness tests. • Column (1) is the regression between Y1 (Understanding) and X comic book contract or not. • Column (2) is the regression between Y2 (Enjoyment) and X comic book contract or not. • Column (3) is the regression between Y3

The model main regression with full samples
(Apprehension) and X comic book contract or not. • Column (4) is the regression between Y4 (Presentation) and X comic book contract or not. Note: t statistics in parentheses, R 2 _ a is the adjusted robust standard errors, the below is same. *p < 0.1, ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01. Note: t statistics in parentheses, R 2 _ a is the adjusted robust standard errors, the below is same. *p < 0.1, ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01.
• Column (5) is the regression between Y5 (Understandable) and X comic book contract or not. • Column (6) is the regression between Y6 (Reputation) and X comic book contract or not. • Column (7) is the regression between Y7 (Explainability) and X comic book contract or not. • Column (8) is the regression between Y8 (Manageability) and X comic book contract or not. • Column (9) is the regression between Y9 (Recommendable) and X comic book contract or not. • Column (10) is the regression between Y10 (Valued) and X comic book contract or not. Table 8 outlines the main regression results, with asterisks (*) signifying a positive and significant result. One asterisk (*) indicates significance of 10%, two asterisks (**) indicates significance of 5%, and three asterisks (***) indicates significance of 1%.
Here, we can see that the variables Y1,Y2,Y4,Y5, Y6, Y7, Y8,Y9 and Y10 have positive coefficients, showing that all have had a positive impact, with significance at the 1% level. Y3 (apprehension) is a negative coefficient at −0.524, demonstrating that apprehension about the contract does not persist with time, with significance indicated at the 1% level. In comparison with the Aurecon contract, the Bankwest dataset shows a negative coefficient, suggesting that people need some time to acclimatize to the more creative comic format. Further, in Note: t statistics in parentheses, R 2 _ a is the adjusted robust standard errors, the below is same. *p < 0.1, ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01. The result remained significant after introducing control variables and re-testing the relationship between X and Y. These regressions are also the robustness tests.. Note: t statistics in parentheses, R 2 _ a is the adjusted robust standard errors, the below is same. *p < 0.1, ** p < 0.05, *** p < 0.01.
case of the banking contract, the negative coefficient of apprehension indicates a decreased transaction cost.
The result remains significantly positive, even after adding control variables and re-testing the relationship between X and Y. The coefficients separately are: • 0.280 at the 5% level, when using Y8, Y9 and Y10 as control variables; • 0.285 at the 5% level when using Y9 and Y10 as control variables; • 0.256 at the 5% level when using Y7 and Y8 as control variables; • 0.467 at the 1% level when using Y8 as the control variable; • 0.270 at the 5% level when using Y7 as the control variable; • 0.379 at the 1% level when using Y6 as the control variable; • 0.208 at the 10% level when using Y1 and Y2 as control variables; • 0.377 at the 1% level when using Y1 as control variables.
Thus, these regressions provide an additional test of robustness. The above results display our analysis of the Aurecon and Bankwest data sets, using data gathered through the same survey and methodology.
The results indicate that all measurements of transaction costs (contracting cost and enforcement cost) are reduced significantly at the 1%, 5% and 10% levels. The determinants of these outcomes are the psychological dimensions of the respondent's comprehension, engagement and perception, which is also the operating mechanism of the contract format's effect on the transaction cost. During an individual's processing of the contract, these psychological factors are the bridges connecting the contract format to the transaction cost.

Robustness test further explanations
We used ten variables to measure the transaction cost directly across ten perspectives of the contracting and enforcement cost aspects of the transaction cost. As the following Chart 1 shows, ten regressions have been done by replacing variables for both Aurecon and Bankwest, twenty-six regressions have been done by adding control variables for Aurecon, and thirteen regressions have been done by adding control variables for Bankwest. At the same time, two sets of data from Aurecon and Bankwest have been run through the same experimental design model. Through the methods of replacing dependent variables/adding control variables and changing samples (Aurecon and Bankwest) outlined above, all the outcomes are shown to be robust. This is expanded upon further in Appendix A At the same time, the comparisons conducted are between two groups of respondents from the same company with the same demographic information. Whilst this results in a very low level of individual heterogeneity, we have controlled this limitation through the use of gender and age in the Aurecon analysis.

Endogeneity explanations
For all variables in this model, there is no reverse impact from Y to X, as respondents were only completed the survey after signing the contract. The focus of this study was not on respondent's preference for either contract format, but instead on their reactions to the particular format with which they were presented. As a result, there was no potential for further endogeneity.

IV. Conclusions
Contracts are a mechanism designed to, amongst other functions, promote efficacy in commercial relationships and provide a clear understanding of roles. Many common contracts are too complex for their intended purpose, undermining the goals of clarity and transparency and comprehension. Visual approaches, such as comic contracts, are one way of addressing unnecessary complexity.
As the above analysis demonstrates, it is possible to empirically prove the efficacy of visual contracts in vitro, using Transaction Cost Economics. The large dataset, analysing the experiences of 451 realworld users of these contracts, demonstrates that the visual law approach, and comic book contracting in particular, can significantly reduce transaction costs. As such, they are much more efficient than traditional 'text-based' contracts. It is clear from these results that for organizations concerned about their relationships with their contracting counterparts, visual contracts are a useful tool to promote more positive relationships, better understanding of mutual obligations, and a more efficient contracting environment.
These results are encouraging, but further research would be beneficial, across a range of different scenarios. For example, there was no data collected about the attributes of the users in terms of disability or neurotypicality. We believe further research on this issue is necessary. Further, this research is undertaken in a Common Law jurisdiction, Australia, in which long written contracts are a cultural norm. As such, the visual Chart 1. Regressions across Aurecon and Bankwest Contracts. approach may be beneficial primarily because it so dramatically reduces the volume of contractual information. Additional studies could compare results in a Civil Law jurisdiction, where shorter contracts are the norm, to examine whether the same extent of transaction cost reduction occurs. Additionally, it is worth noting that this study is based on users subjective perceptions of the contract, and therefore inherently carries the risk that the users may inadequately assess their own comprehension of the contract. Further research using objective measures of user understanding would be helpful to supplement the findings presented in this paper. A second limitation is that these results cannot be generalized beyond the standard-form contracting situation -involving terms and conditions -and additional research is be required to assess the use of visual methods in negotiated contracts. This research is currently underway at UWA, sponsored by Aurecon.
Finally, this paper has been predicated on the assumption that entities such as banks and employers would wish the users of their contracts to understand them, and to read them. As Sovern (2006) observes, there are situations in which it may be rational and beneficial to the firm that their proffered contacts not be understood by their intended users. However, this is a position that is both economically inefficient when viewed as a whole, and may also be illegal in some circumstances. It will also be an increasingly untenable position as consumers and other users of contracts increasingly demand that they be presented in a comprehensible, accessible manner.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Funding
The work was supported by the Bankwest, Aurecon and WAiS .