Risk communication with pictographs: The role of numeracy and graph processing

Judgment and Decision Making

Volumn 6, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 263-274

  Hess, Rebecca ^a   Visschers, Vivianne H M ^a   Siegrist, Michael ^a  

^a ETH ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Numeracy; Pictographs; Reference information; Risk communication; Risk perception

Indexed keywords

EID: 79955765244     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19302975     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Adelsward, V., & Sachs, L. (1996). The meaning of 6.8: Numeracy and normality in health information talks. Social Science and Medicine, 43, 1179-1187.
2. Apter, A. J., Paasche-Orlow, M. K., Remillard, J. T., Bennett, I. M., Ben-Joseph, E. P., Batista, R. M., Hyde, J., & Rudd, R. E. (2008). Numeracy and communication with patients: They are counting on us. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 23, 2117-2124.
3. Dillard, A. J., McCaul, K. D., Kelso, P. D., & Klein, W. M. P. (2006). Resisting good news: Reactions to breast cancer risk communication. Health Communication, 19, 115-123.
4. Donelle, L., Arocha, J. F., & Hoffman-Goetz, L. (2008). Health literacy and numeracy: Key factors in cancer risk comprehension. Chronic Diseases in Canada, 29, 1-8.
5. Edwards, A., Elwyn, G., & Mulley, A. (2002). Explaining risks: Turning numerical data into meaningful pictures. British Medical Journal, 324, 827-830.
6. Fagerlin, A., Zikmund-Fisher, B. J., Ubel, P. A., Jankovic, A., Derry, H. A., & Smith, D. M. (2007). Measuring numeracy without a math test: Development of the subjective numeracy scale. Medical Decision Making, 27, 672-680.
7. 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.
8. Galesic, M., Garcia-Retamero, R., & Gigerenzer, G. (2009). Using icon arrays to communicate medical risks: Overcoming low numeracy. Health Psychology, 28, 210-216.
9. Gigerenzer, G., & Edwards, A. (2003). Simple tools for understanding risks: From innumeracy to insight. British Medical Journal, 327, 741-744.
10. Hanoch, Y., Miron-Shatz, T., & Himmelstein, M. (2010). Genetic testing and risk interpretation: How do women understand lifetime risk results? Judgment and Decision Making, 5, 116-123.
11. Hawley, S. T., Zikmund-Fisher, B., Ubel, P., Jancovic, A., Lucas, T., & Fagerlin, A. (2008). The impact of the format of graphical presentation on health-related knowledge and treatment choices. Patient Education and Counseling, 73, 448-455.
12. Hoffrage, U., Lindsey, S., Hertwig, R., & Gigerenzer, G. (2000). Medicine-Communicating statistical information. Science, 290, 2261-2262.
13. Keller, C., & Siegrist, M. (2009). Effect of risk communication formats on risk perception depending on numeracy. Medical Decision Making, 29, 483-490.
14. Lipkus, I. M. (2007). Numeric, verbal, and visual formats of conveying health risks: Suggested best practices and future recommendations. Medical Decision Making, 27, 696-713.
15. Lipkus, I. M., &Peters, E. (2009). Understanding the role of numeracy in health: Proposed theoretical framework and practical insights. Health Education and Behavior, 36, 1065-1081.
16. Lipkus, I. M., Peters, E., Kimmick, G., Liotcheva, V., & Marcom, P. (2010). Breast cancer patients' treatment expectations after exposure to the decision aid program Adjuvant Online: The influence of numeracy. Medical Decision Making, 30, 464-473.
17. 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.
18. Nelson, W., Reyna, V. F., Fagerlin, A., Lipkus, I., & Peters, E. (2008). Clinical implications of numeracy: Theory and practice. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 35, 261-274.
19. Paling, J. (2003). Strategies to help patients understand risks. British Medical Journal, 327, 745-748.
20. Peters, E. (2008). Numeracy and the perception and communication of risk. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1128, 1-7.
21. Peters, E., Dieckmann, N. F., Mertz, C. K., Vastfjall, D., Slovic, P., & Hibbard, J. H. (2009). Bringing meaning to numbers: The impact of evaluative categories on decisions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 15, 213-227.
22. 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.
23. 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, 966-972.
24. Siegrist, M., Orlow, P., & Keller, C. (2008). The effect of graphical and numerical presentation of hypothetical prenatal diagnosis results on risk perception. Medical Decision Making, 28, 567-574. SPSS, Inc./IBM corp., www.spss.com.
25. Tanius, B. E., Wood, S., Hanoch, Y., & Rice, T. (2009). Aging and choice: Applications to Medicare Part D. Judgment and Decision Making, 4, 92-101.
26. Visschers, V. H. M., Meertens, R. M., Passchier, W. F., & de Vries, N. K. (2009). Probability information in risk communication: A review of the research literature. Risk Analysis, 29, 267-287.
27. Zikmund-Fisher, B. J., Fagerlin, A., Keeton, K., & Ubel, P. A. (2007). Does labeling prenatal screening test results as negative or positive affect a woman's responses? American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 197, 528e.1-528e.6.
28. Zikmund-Fisher, B. J., Fagerlin, A., & Ubel, P. A. (2008). Improving understanding of adjuvant therapy options by using simpler risk graphics. Cancer, 113, 3382-3390.
29. Zikmund-Fisher, B. J., Ubel, P. A., Smith, D. M., Derry, H. A., McClure, J. B., Stark, A., Pitsch, R. K., & Fagerlin, A. (2008). Communicating side effect risks in a tamoxifen prophylaxis decision aid: The debiasing influence of pictographs. Patient Education and Counseling, 73, 209-214.