Literature DB >> 18442447

The impact of numeracy on reactions to different graphic risk presentation formats: An experimental analogue study.

Alison J Wright1, Sophia C L Whitwell, Chika Takeichi, Matthew Hankins, Theresa M Marteau.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Numeracy, the ability to process basic mathematical concepts, may affect responses to graphical displays of health risk information. Displays of probabilistic risk information using grouped dots are easier to understand than displays using dispersed dots. However, dispersed dots may better convey the randomness with which health threats occur, so increasing perceived susceptibility. We hypothesized that low numeracy participants would better understand risks presented using grouped dot displays, while high numeracy participants would have good understanding, regardless of display type. Moreover, we predicted that dispersed dot displays, in contrast to grouped dot displays, would increase risk perceptions and worry only for highly numerate individuals. DESIGN AND
METHOD: One hundred and forty smokers read vignettes asking them to imagine being at risk of Crohn's disease, in a 2(display type: dispersed/grouped dots) x 3(risk magnitude: 3%/6%/50%) x 2(numeracy: high/low) design. They completed measures of risk comprehension, perceived susceptibility and worry.
RESULTS: More numerate participants had better objective risk comprehension, but this effect was not moderated by display type. There was marginally significant support for the predicted numeracy x display type interaction for worry about Crohn's disease, but not for perceived susceptibility to the condition.
CONCLUSIONS: Dispersed dot displays somewhat increase worry in highly numerate individuals, but only numeracy influenced objective risk comprehension. The most effective display type for communicating risk information will depend on the numeracy of the population and the goal(s) of the communication.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18442447     DOI: 10.1348/135910708X304432

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Health Psychol        ISSN: 1359-107X


  13 in total

1.  Winning or losing a bet and the perception of randomness.

Authors:  Leehu Zysberg; Shaul Kimhi
Journal:  J Gambl Stud       Date:  2013-03

2.  A focus group study on breast cancer risk presentation: one format does not fit all.

Authors:  Michel Dorval; Karine Bouchard; Jocelyne Chiquette; Gord Glendon; Christine M Maugard; Wilhelm Dubuisson; Seema Panchal; Jacques Simard
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2012-11-21       Impact factor: 4.246

3.  Psychological inoculation improves resilience against misinformation on social media.

Authors:  Jon Roozenbeek; Sander van der Linden; Beth Goldberg; Steve Rathje; Stephan Lewandowsky
Journal:  Sci Adv       Date:  2022-08-24       Impact factor: 14.957

4.  Blocks, ovals, or people? Icon type affects risk perceptions and recall of pictographs.

Authors:  Brian J Zikmund-Fisher; Holly O Witteman; Mark Dickson; Andrea Fuhrel-Forbis; Valerie C Kahn; Nicole L Exe; Melissa Valerio; Lisa G Holtzman; Laura D Scherer; Angela Fagerlin
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2013-11-18       Impact factor: 2.583

5.  Stability of Risk Perception Across Pandemic and Non-pandemic Situations Among Young Adults: Evaluating the Impact of Individual Differences.

Authors:  Melissa T Buelow; Jennifer M Kowalsky; Amy B Brunell
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2022-02-24

6.  How discriminating are discriminative instruments?

Authors:  Matthew Hankins
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2008-05-27       Impact factor: 3.186

Review 7.  Addressing health literacy in patient decision aids.

Authors:  Kirsten J McCaffery; Margaret Holmes-Rovner; Sian K Smith; David Rovner; Don Nutbeam; Marla L Clayman; Karen Kelly-Blake; Michael S Wolf; Stacey L Sheridan
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2013-11-29       Impact factor: 2.796

8.  Impact of low alcohol verbal descriptors on perceived strength: An experimental study.

Authors:  Milica Vasiljevic; Dominique-Laurent Couturier; Theresa M Marteau
Journal:  Br J Health Psychol       Date:  2017-10-09

9.  Impact on product appeal of labeling wine and beer with (a) lower strength alcohol verbal descriptors and (b) percent alcohol by volume (%ABV): An experimental study.

Authors:  Milica Vasiljevic; Dominique-Laurent Couturier; Theresa M Marteau
Journal:  Psychol Addict Behav       Date:  2018-08-30

10.  Risk communication in tables versus text: a registered report randomized trial on 'fact boxes'.

Authors:  Cameron Brick; Michelle McDowell; Alexandra L J Freeman
Journal:  R Soc Open Sci       Date:  2020-03-25       Impact factor: 2.963

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.