Patient knowledge and recall of health information following exposure to "facts and myths" message format variations

Patient Education and Counseling

Volumn 92, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 381-387

  Cameron, Kenzie A ^a   Roloff, Michael E ^b   Friesema, Elisha M ^a   Brown, Tiffany ^a   Jovanovic, Borko D ^a   Hauber, Sara ^a   Baker, David W ^a  

^a NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Influenza; Message design; Message framing; Patient education; Recall accuracy

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DECEPTION; FEMALE; HUMAN; INFLUENZA VACCINATION; INFORMATION LITERACY; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MALE; MEDICAL INFORMATION; PATIENT ATTITUDE; PATIENT EDUCATION; PRETEST POSTTEST DESIGN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECALL; RECALL ACCURACY; VISUAL INFORMATION;

INFLUENZA; MESSAGE DESIGN; MESSAGE FRAMING; PATIENT EDUCATION; RECALL ACCURACY;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; DELIVERY OF HEALTH CARE; FEMALE; HEALTH COMMUNICATION; HEALTH KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, PRACTICE; HEALTH PROMOTION; HUMANS; INFLUENZA VACCINES; MALE; MENTAL RECALL; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT EDUCATION AS TOPIC; SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS; VACCINATION;

EID: 84882240726     PISSN: 07383991     EISSN: 18735134     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2013.06.017     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. World Health Organization Influenza (seasonal) fact sheet No. 211 [Internet]. Geneva, Switzerland 2009, April [cited 01.10.12]. Available from: www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs211/en/index.html.
2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Prevention and control of influenza: recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2008, 57:1-60.
3. Thompson W.W., Shay D.K., Weintraub E., Brammer L., Bridges C.B., Cox N.J., et al. Influenza-associated hospitalizations in the United States. J Amer Med Assoc 2004, 292:1333-1340.
4. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Key facts about influenza and the influenza vaccine [Internet]. Atlanta (GA) 2006, [cited 10.01.07]. Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/flu/keyfacts.htm.
5. National Center for Health Statistics Health, United States, 2006 with chartbook on trends in the health of Americans [Internet]. Hyattsville (MD) 2006, [cited 13.08.12]. Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hus/hus06.pdf.
6. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Flu vaccination coverage, United States, 2011-12 influenza season [Internet]. Atlanta (GA) 2012, [cited 15.01.13]; Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/flu/professionals/vaccination/coverage_1112estimates.htm.
7. Healthy People.gov. Immunization and infectious diseases [Internet]. Washington (DC) 2012, [updated 30 Oct 2012; cited 7 Dec 2012]; Available from: http://www.healthypeople.gov/2020/topicsobjectives2020/objectiveslist.aspx?topicId=23.
8. Santibanez T.A., Singleton J.A., Greby S., Kennedy E.D., Clark S.J. National early season flu vaccination coverage: United States, 2012-2013 flu season [Internet]. Atlanta (GA) 2012, [updated 3 Dec 2012; cited 07.12.12]; Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/flu/pdf/fluvaxview/nifs-estimates-nov2012.pdf.
9. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Flu vaccine facts & myths [Internet]. Atlanta (GA) 2007, [cited 26.10.07]; Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/flu/professionals/flugallery/2007-08/pdf/f_factmyth_8x11.pdf.
10. British Columbia Ministry of Health Influenza (flu) immunization: myths and facts [Internet]. Vancouver (BC): 2006, [updated Sept 2012; cited 26.10.07] Available from: http://www.bchealthguide.org/healthfiles/hfile12c.stm.
11. Skurnik I., Yoon C., Park D.C., Schwarz N. How warnings about false claims become recommendations. J Consum Res 2005, 31:713-724.
12. Schwarz N., Sanna L.J., Skurnik I., Yoon C. Metacognitive experiences and the intracacies of setting people straight: implications for debiasing and public information campaigns. Adv Exp Soc Psychol, Vol. 39 2007, 127-161. Elsevier, London. M.P. Zanna (Ed.).
13. Begg I.M., Anas A., Fairinacci S. Dissociation of processes in belief: source recollection, statement familiarity, and the illusion of truth. J Exp Psychol Gen 1992, 121:446-458.
14. Allen M. Meta-Analysis Comparing the persuasiveness of one-sided and two-sided messages. West J Sp Commun 1991, 55:390-404.
15. Allen M., Hale J., Mongeau P., Berkowitz-Stafford S., Stafford S., Shanahan W., et al. Testing a model of message sidedness: three replications. Commun Monogr 1990, 57:275-291.
16. O'Keefe D.J. How to handle opposing arguments in persuasive messages: a meta-analytic review of the effects of one-sided and two-sided messages. Communication yearbook 1999, 209-249. Sage, Thousand Oaks. M.E. Roloff (Ed.).
17. Hovland C.I., Lumsdaine A., Sheffield R. The effects of presenting 'one side' versus 'both sides' in changing opinions on a controversial subject. Experiments on mass communication: studies in social psychology in World War II 1949, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
18. Lewandowsky S., Eckerl U.K.H., Seifert C.M., Schwarz N., Cook J. Misinformation and its correction: continued influence and successful debiasing. Psychological Science in the Public Interest 2012, 13:106-131.
19. Stenner A. Measuring reading comprehension with the Lexile Framework 1996, MetaMetrics, Inc, Durham, NC.
20. Stenner A.J., Horablin I., Smith D.R.M.S. The Lexile Framework 1988, MetaMetrics, Inc, Durham, NC.
21. MetaMetrics The Lexile framework for reading: Lexile Analyzer [Internet]. Durham (NC) 2013, [cited 29.10.07]; Available from: http://www.lexile.com/analyzer/.
22. Lennon C.H.B. The Lexile framework as an approach for reading measurement and success 2004, MetaMetrics, Inc., Durham, NC.
23. Chan M. World now at the start of 2009 influenza pandemic [Internet]. Geneva, Switzerland 2009, [cited Jan 2013]; Available from: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/statements/2009/h1n1_pandemic_phase6_20090611/en/index.html.