Literature DB >> 21284684

Using a familiar risk comparison within a risk ladder to improve risk understanding by low numerates: a study of visual attention.

Carmen Keller1.   

Abstract

Previous experimental research provides evidence that a familiar risk comparison within a risk ladder is understood by low- and high-numerate individuals. It especially helps low numerates to better evaluate risk. In the present study, an eye tracker was used to capture individuals' visual attention to a familiar risk comparison, such as the risk associated with smoking. Two parameters of information processing-efficiency and level-were derived from visual attention. A random sample of participants from the general population (N= 68) interpreted a given risk level with the help of the risk ladder. Numeracy was negatively correlated with overall visual attention on the risk ladder (r(s) =-0.28, p= 0.01), indicating that the lower the numeracy, the more the time spent looking at the whole risk ladder. Numeracy was positively correlated with the efficiency of processing relevant frequency (r(s) = 0.34, p < 0.001) and relevant textual information (r(s) = 0.34, p < 0.001), but not with the efficiency of processing relevant comparative information and numerical information. There was a significant negative correlation between numeracy and the level of processing of relevant comparative risk information (r(s) =-0.21, p < 0.01), indicating that low numerates processed the comparative risk information more deeply than the high numerates. There was no correlation between numeracy and perceived risk. These results add to previous experimental research, indicating that the smoking risk comparison was crucial for low numerates to evaluate and understand risk. Furthermore, the eye-tracker method is promising for studying information processing and improving risk communication formats.
© 2011 Society for Risk Analysis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21284684     DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01577.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Risk Anal        ISSN: 0272-4332            Impact factor:   4.000


  2 in total

1.  An Exploratory Application of Eye-Tracking Methods in a Discrete Choice Experiment.

Authors:  Caroline Vass; Dan Rigby; Kelly Tate; Andrew Stewart; Katherine Payne
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2018-08       Impact factor: 2.583

Review 2.  A Balanced Risk-Benefit Analysis to Determine Human Risks Associated with Pyrrolizidine Alkaloids (PA)-The Case of Herbal Medicinal Products Containing St. John's Wort Extracts (SJW).

Authors:  Michael Habs; Karin Binder; Stefan Krauss; Karolina Müller; Brigitte Ernst; Luzia Valentini; Michael Koller
Journal:  Nutrients       Date:  2018-06-22       Impact factor: 5.717

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.