Reducing aversion to side effects in preventive medical treatment decisions

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied

Volumn 13, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 11-21

  Waters, Erika A ^a,e   Weinstein, Neil D ^a   Colditz, Graham A ^b,d   Emmons, Karen M ^c,d  

^a RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b BRIGHAM AND WOMEN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

^c DANA FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

^d HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^e NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

Decision making; Graphical display; Risk communication; Risk perception; Visual display

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; DECISION MAKING; ESCAPE BEHAVIOR; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM; PREVENTIVE HEALTH SERVICE;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; COMMUNICATION; DECISION MAKING; ESCAPE REACTION; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASMS; PREVENTIVE HEALTH SERVICES;

EID: 33947644902     PISSN: 1076898X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/1076-898X.13.1.11     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Baron, J., Granato, L., Spranca, M., & Teubal, E. (1993). Decision making biases in children and early adolescents: Exploratory studies. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 39, 23-47.
2. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.
3. Bettman, J. R., Johnson, E. J., & Payne, J. W. (1990). A componential analysis of cognitive effort in choice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 45, 111-139.
4. Bogardus, S. T., Holmboe, E., & Jekel, J. F. (1999). Perils, pitfalls, and possibilities in talking about medical risk. Journal of the American Medical Association, 281, 1037-1041.
5. Cleveland, W. S., & McGill, R. (1984). Graphical perception: Theory, experimentation, and application to the development of graphical methods. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 79, 531-554.
6. Cuite, C. (2003). A test of numeric formats for risk communication. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey.
7. Edwards, A., Elwyn, G., & Gwyn, R. (1999). General practice registrar responses to the use of different risk communication tools in simulated consultations: A focus group study. British Medical Journal, 319, 749-752.
8. Epstein, J., Klinkenberg, W. D., Wiley, D., & McKinley, L. (2001). Insuring sample equivalence across Internet and paper-and-pencil assessments. Computers in Human Behavior, 17, 339-346.
9. Feldman-Stewart, D., Kocovski, N., McConnell, B. A., Brundage, M. D., & Mackillop, W. J. (2000). Perception of quantitative information for treatment decisions. Medical Decision Making, 20, 228-238.
10. Gigerenzer, G., & Hoffrage, U. (1995). How to improve Bayesian reasoning without instruction: Frequency formats. Psychological Review, 102, 684-704.
11. Goh, S. K., & Coury, B. G. (1994). Incorporating the effect of display formats in cognitive modelling. Ergonomics, 37, 725-745.
12. Gosling, S. D., Vazire, S., Srivastava, S., & John, O. P. (2004). Should we trust Web-based studies? American Psychologist, 59, 93-104.
13. Hogarth, R., & Kunreuther, H. (1995). Decision making under ignorance: Arguing with yourself. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 10, 15-36.
14. Hollands, J. G., & Spence, I. (1992). Judgments of change and proportion in graphical perception. Human Factors, 34, 313-334.
15. Johnson, E. J., & Payne, J. W. (1985). Effort and accuracy in choice. Management Science, 31, 395-414.
16. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263-291.
17. Krantz, J. H., & Dalal, R. (2000). Validity of Web-based psychological research. In M. H. Birnbaum (Ed.), Psychological experiments on the Internet (pp. 35-60). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
18. Lipkus, I. M., & Hollands, J. O. (1999). The visual communication of risk. Journal of the National Cancer Institute Monographs, 25, 149-163.
19. Lipkus, I. M., Samsa, G., & Rimer, B. K. (2001). General performance on a numeracy scale among highly educated samples. Medical Decision Making, 21, 37-44.
20. Lobb, E. A., Butow, P. N., Kenny, D. T., & Tattersall, M. H. (1999). Communicating prognosis in early breast cancer: Do women understand the language used? Medical Journal of Australia, 171, 290-294.
21. MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., Hoffman, J. M., West, S. G., & Sheets, V. (2002). A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects. Psychological Methods, 7, 83-104.
22. Mazur, D. J., Hickam, D. H., & Mazur, M. D. (1999). How patients' preferences for risk information influence treatment choice in a case of high risk and high therapeutic uncertainty: Asymptomatic localized prostate cancer. Medical Decision Making, 19, 394-398.
23. Panidis, D., Rousso, D., Kourtis, A., Giannoulis, C., Mavromatidis, G., & Stergiopolous, K. (2001). Hormone replacement therapy at the threshold of the 21st century. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, 99, 154-164.
24. Port, E. R., Montgomery, L. L., Heerdt, A. S., & Borgen, P. I. (2001). Patient reluctance toward Tamoxifen use for breast cancer primary prevention. Annals of Surgical Oncology, 8, 580-585.
25. Reyna, V. F., Lloyd, F. J., & Brainerd, C. J. (2003). Memory, development, and rationality: An integrative theory of judgment and decision-making. In S. Schneider & J. Shanteau (Eds.), Emerging perspectives on judgment and decision research (pp. 201-245). New York: Cambridge University Press.
26. SAS. (2005). The SAS System for Windows (Version 9.1) [Computer software]. Cary, NC: SAS Institute.
27. Schapira, M. M., Nattinger, A. B., & McHorney, C. A. (2001). Frequency or probability? A qualitative study of risk communication formats used in health care. Medical Decision Making, 21, 459-467.
28. Schirillo, J. A., & Stone, E. R. (2005). The greater ability of graphical versus numerical displays to increase risk avoidance involves a common mechanism. Risk Analysis, 25, 555-566.
29. Spence, I., & Lewandowsky, S. (1991). Displaying proportions and percentages. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 5, 61-77.
30. Stone, E. R., Sieck, W. R., Bull, B. E., Yates, J. F., Parks, S. C., & Rush, C. J. (2003). Foreground:background salience: Explaining the effects of graphical displays on risk avoidance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 90, 19-36.
31. Stone, E. R., Yates, J. F., & Parker, A. M. (1997). Effects of numerical and graphical displays on professed risk-taking behavior. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 3, 243-256.
32. Thaler, R. (1985). Mental accounting and consumer choice. Marketing Science, 4, 199-215.
33. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1992). Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 5, 297-323.
34. Waters, E. A., Weinstein, N. D., Colditz, G. A., & Emmons, K. (2006). Formats for improving risk communication in medical tradeoff decisions. Journal of Health Communication, 11, 167-182.
35. Waters, E. A., Weinstein, N. D., Colditz, G. A., & Emmons, K. (in press). Aversion to side effects in preventive medical treatment decisions. British Journal of Health Psychology.
36. Weinstein, N. D. (1999). What does it mean to understand a risk? Evaluating risk comprehension. Journal of the National Cancer Institute Monographs, 25, 15-20.
37. Wills, C. E., & Holmes-Rovner, M. (2003). Patient comprehension of information for shared treatment decision making: State of the art and future research. Patient Education and Counseling, 50, 285-290.
38. Wroe, A. L., Turner, N., & Salkovskis, P. M. (2004). Understanding and predicting parental decisions about early childhood immunizations. Health Psychology, 23, 33-41.