Effect of communication strategy on personal risk perception and treatment adherence intentions

Psychology, Health and Medicine

Volumn 14, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 430-442

  Young, Sean ^a,b   Oppenheimer, Daniel M ^c  

^a STANFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b STANFORD UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^c PRINCETON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Adherence; Overestimation; Risk communication; Risk perception; Semantic versus numerical risk information

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; HEALTH BEHAVIOR; HUMAN; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; PATIENT COMPLIANCE; PERCEPTION; PRESCRIPTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; RISK ASSESSMENT; SEMANTICS; UNITED STATES;

ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; HUMANS; INTENTION; PATIENT COMPLIANCE; PERSUASIVE COMMUNICATION; QUESTIONNAIRES; RISK ASSESSMENT; SAN FRANCISCO; SEMANTICS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 70249115127     PISSN: 13548506     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/13548500902890103     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Berry, D.C., Michas, I.C., & Bersellini, E. (2003). Communicating information about medication: the benefits of making it personal. Psychology & Health, 18(1), 127-139.
2. Brase, G.L. (2002). Which statistical formats facilitate what decisions? The perception and influence of different statistical information formats. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 15(5), 381-401.
3. Brase, G.L., Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (1998). Individuation, counting, and statistical inference: the role of frequency and whole-object representations in judgment under uncertainty. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 127(1), 3-21.
4. Bryant, G.D., & Norman, G.R. (1980). Expressions of probability: words and numbers. The New England Journal of Medicine, 302(7), 411.
5. Budescu, D.V., Weinberg, S., & Wallsten, T.S. (1988). Decisions based on numerically and verbally expressed uncertainties. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 14(2), 281-294.
6. Burkell, J. (2004). What are the chances? Evaluating risk and benefit information in consumer health materials. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 92(2), 200-208.
7. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2005a). Aspergillosis. Retrieved June 15, 2005 from http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dbmd/diseaseinfo/ aspergillosis-t.htm
8. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2005b). Botulism. Retrieved June 15, 2005, from http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dbmd/diseaseinfo/botulism-g.htm
9. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2005c). Cryptococcosis. Retrieved June 15, 2005, from http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dbmd/diseaseinfo/ cryptococcosis-t.htm
10. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2005d). Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS): questions and answers; Travel and quarantine. Retrieved April 16, 2006, from http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/sars/qa/travel.htm
11. Cohn, M., Schydlower, M., Foley, J., & Copeland, R.L. (1995). Adolescents' misinterpretation of health risk probability expressions. Pediatrics, 95(5), 713-716.
12. Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (1996). Are humans good intuitive statisticians after all? Rethinking some conclusions from the literature on judgment under uncertainty. Cognition, 58(1), 1-73.
13. Ditto, P.H., Jacobson, J.A., Smucker, W.D., Danks, J.H., & Fagerlin, A. (2006). Context changes choices: a prospective study of the effects of hospitalization on life-sustaining treatment preferences. Medical Decision Making, 26(4), 313-322.
14. Ditto, P.H., & Lopez, D.F. (2005). Motivated skepticism: Use of differential decision criteria for preferred and nonpreferred conclusions. Key readings in social psychology (p. 656). New York, NY, US: Psychology Press.
15. Edwards, A. (2004). Flexible rather than standardized approaches to communicating risks in health care. Quality and Safety in Health Care, 13(2), 169-170.
16. Edwards, A., Elwyn, G., Covey, J., Matthews, E., & Pill, R. (2001). Presenting risk information - A review of the effects of "framing" and other manipulations on patient outcomes. Journal of Health Communication, 6(1), 61-82.
17. Epstein, R.M., Alper, B.S., & Quill, T.E. (2004). Communicating evidence for participatory decision making. Journal of the American Medical Association, 291(19), 2359-2366.
18. Erev, I., & Cohen, B.L. (1990). Verbal versus numerical probabilities: efficiency, biases, and the preference paradox. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 45(1), 1-18.
19. Food and Drug Administration (2004). Brief summary: Disclosing risk information in consumer-directed print advertisements. Guidance for industry. Retrieved April 18, 2006, from http://www.fda.gov/cder/guidance/5669dft.htm
20. Gigerenzer, G. (1998). Ecological intelligence: An adaptation for frequencies. In D. Cummins Dellarosa & C. Allen (Eds.), The evolution of mind (pp. 9-29). New York, NY, US: Oxford University Press.
21. Gonzalez, M., & Frenck-Mestre, C. (1993). Determinants of numerical versus verbal probabilities. Acta Psychologica, 83(1), 33-51.
22. Grice, H.P. (1975). Logic and conversation (Vol. 9). New York: Academic.
23. International Adult Literacy Survey. (2000). Literacy in the information age: Final report of the International Adult Literacy Survey. Paris, France: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
24. Iowa State University. (2006). Fast facts: rift valley fever. Center for Food Security and Public Health, 1(1), 1-3.
25. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1982). The psychology of preferences. Scientific American, 246(1), 160-173.
26. Lyles, A. (2002). Direct marketing of pharmaceuticals to consumers. Annual Review of Public Health, 23, 73-91.
27. Marteau, G., Saidi, S., Goodburn, J., Lawton, S., Michie, S., & Bobrow, M. (2000). Numbers of words? A randomized controlled trial of presenting screen negative results to pregnant women. Prenatal diagnosis, 20(9), 714-718.
28. Marteau, T.M., Senior, V., & Sasieni, P. (2001). Women's understanding of a "normal smear test result": experimental questionnaire based study. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 322(7285), 526-528.
29. Mayo Clinic Health Information. (2005). From bacteria to parasites: Understanding the germs that cause infection. Retrieved June 25, 2005, from http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/ germs/ID00002
30. Merz, J.F., Druzdzel, M.J., & Mazur, D.J. (1991). Verbal expressions of probability in informed consent litigation. Medical Decision Making, 11(4), 273-281.
31. Mosteller, F., & Youtz, C. (1990). Quantifying probabilistic expressions. Statistical Science, 5(1), 2-34.
32. Nakao, M.A., & Axelrod, S. (1983). Numbers are better than words. Verbal specifications of frequency have no place in medicine. The American Journal of Medicine, 74(6), 1061-1065.
33. National Broadcasting Company. (2003). WHO experts: SARS risk on planes overblown; SARS takes heavy toll on Asian travel. Retrieved April 19, 2006, from http://www. nbc4.com/news/2215639/detail.html
34. National Cancer Institute. (2005). Second hand smoke: Questions and answers. Retrieved April 23, 2006 from http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/ factsheet/Tobacco/ETS
35. Olson, M.J., & Budescu, D.V. (1997). Patterns of preference for numerical and verbal probabilities. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 10(2), 117-131.
36. Redelmeier, D.A., Koehler, D.J., Liberman, V., & Tversky, A. (1995). Probability judgment in medicine: discounting unspecified possibilities. Medical Decision Making, 15(3), 227-230.
37. Schechtman, E. (2002). Odds ratio, relative risk, absolute risk reduction, and the number needed to treat - Which of these should we use? Value in Health, 5(5), 431-1336
38. Schwartz, L.M., Woloshin, S., Black, W.C., & Welch, H.G. (1997). The role of numeracy in understanding the benefit of screening mammography. Annals of Internal Medicine, 127(11), 966-972.
39. Stoll, C., Alembik, Y., Dott, B., & Roth, M. (2005). Pathogenesis-clinical-epidemiology: epidemiology of Down syndrome in 118,265 consecutive births. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 37(Suppl 2), 79-83.
40. Stone, D.N., & Schkade, D.A. (1991). Numeric and linguistic information representation in multiattribute choice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 49(1), 42-59.
41. Tavana, M., Kennedy, D.T., & Mohebbi, B. (1997). An applied study using the analytic hierarchy process to translate common verbal phrases to numerical probabilities. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 10(2), 133-150.
42. Viscusi, W.K. (1995). Carcinogen regulation: risk characteristics and the synthetic risk bias. American Economic Review, 85(2), 50-54.
43. Wallsten, T.S. (1990). The costs and benefits of vague information. In R.M. Hogarth (Ed.), Insights in decision making: A tribute to Hillel J. Einhorn (pp. 28-43). Chicago, IL, US: University of Chicago Press.
44. Wallsten, T.S., Budescu, D.V., Zwick, R., & Kemp, S.M. (1993). Preferences and reasons for communicating probabilistic information in verbal or numerical terms. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 31(2), 135-138.
45. Windschitl, P.D., & Weber, E.U. (1999). The interpretation of "likely" depends on the context, but "70%" is 70% - right? The influence of associative processes on perceived certainty. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25(6), 1514-1533.
46. Young, S.D., & Oppenheimer, D.M. (2006). Percentages matter: framing risk information can affect fear of side effects and medication compliance. Clinical Therapeutics, 28(1), 129-139.