The Impact of Information Presentation and Cognitive Dissonance on Processing Systematic Review Summaries: A Randomized Controlled Trial on Bicycle Helmet Legislation

被引:3
作者
Bechard, Benoit [1 ]
Kimmerle, Joachim [2 ]
Lawaree, Justin [3 ]
Bedard, Pierre-Oliver [4 ]
Straus, Sharon E. [5 ]
Ouimet, Mathieu [6 ]
机构
[1] Univ Laval, Sch Psychol, PolitiCo, Quebec City, PQ G1V 0A6, Canada
[2] Leibniz Inst Wissensmedien, D-72076 Tubingen, Germany
[3] Univ Laval, Dept Polit Sci, Int Observ Societal Impact AI & Digital Technol, Quebec City, PQ G1V 0A6, Canada
[4] Govt Canada, Treasury Board Canada Secretariat, GC Expt Team, Ottawa, ON K1A OR5, Canada
[5] St Michaels Hosp, Knowledge Translat Program, Toronto, ON M5B 1W8, Canada
[6] Univ Laval, Dept Polit Sci, PolitiCo, Quebec City, PQ G1V 0A6, Canada
关键词
cognitive dissonance; systematic review summary; bicycle helmet; methodological limitations; experiments; FINDINGS TABLES; COMPREHENSION; INJURIES; UNCERTAINTY; GUIDELINES; SCIENCE;
D O I
10.3390/ijerph19106234
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Background: Summaries of systematic reviews are a reference method for the dissemination of research evidence on the effectiveness of public health interventions beyond the scientific community. Motivated reasoning and cognitive dissonance may interfere with readers' ability to process the information included in such summaries. Methods: We conducted a web experiment on a panel of university-educated North Americans (N = 259) using a systematic review of the effectiveness of bicycle helmet legislation as a test case. The outcome variables were the perceived tentativeness of review findings and attitude toward bicycle helmet legislation. We manipulated two types of uncertainty: (i) deficient uncertainty (inclusion vs. non-inclusion of information on limitations of the studies included in the review) and (ii) consensus uncertainty (consensual findings showing legislation effectiveness vs. no evidence of effectiveness). We also examined whether reported expertise in helmet legislation and the frequency of wearing a helmet while cycling interact with the experimental factors. Results: None of the experimental manipulations had a main effect on the perceived tentativeness. The presentation of consensual efficacy findings had a positive main effect on the attitude toward the legislation. Self-reported expertise had a significant main effect on the perceived tentativeness, and exposing participants with reported expertise to results showing a lack of evidence of efficacy increased their favorable attitude toward the legislation. Participants' helmet use was positively associated with their attitude toward the legislation (but not with perceived tentativeness). Helmet use did not interact with the experimental manipulations. Conclusions: Motivated reasoning and cognitive dissonance influence a reader's ability to process information contained in a systematic review summary.
引用
收藏
页数:17
相关论文
共 62 条
[1]  
Adams J.G.U., 1982, SAE T, V91, P2824, DOI DOI 10.4271/820819
[2]   A history of the evolution of guidelines for reporting medical research: the long road to the EQUATOR Network [J].
Altman, Douglas G. ;
Simera, Iveta .
JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY OF MEDICINE, 2016, 109 (02) :67-77
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2001, UND SYST REV RES EFF
[4]  
Beynon P, 2012, WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES, P115
[5]   Communicating Evidence-Based Information on Cancer Prevention to State-Level Policy Makers [J].
Brownson, Ross C. ;
Dodson, Elizabeth A. ;
Stamatakis, Katherine A. ;
Casey, Christopher M. ;
Elliott, Michael B. ;
Luke, Douglas A. ;
Wintrode, Christopher G. ;
Kreuter, Matthew W. .
JNCI-JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, 2011, 103 (04) :306-316
[6]   Hedged Language and Partisan Media Influence Belief in Science Claims [J].
Butterfuss, Reese ;
Aubele, Joseph ;
Kendeou, Panayiota .
SCIENCE COMMUNICATION, 2020, 42 (02) :147-171
[7]   Improving GRADE evidence tables part 1: a randomized trial shows improved understanding of content in summary of findings tables with a new format [J].
Carrasco-Labra, Alonso ;
Brignardello-Petersen, Romina ;
Santesso, Nancy ;
Neumann, Ignacio ;
Mustafa, Reem A. ;
Mbuagbaw, Lawrence ;
Ikobaltzeta, Itziar Etxeandia ;
De Stio, Catherine ;
McCullagh, Lauren J. ;
Alonso-Coello, Pablo ;
Meerpohl, Joerg J. ;
Vandvik, Per Olav ;
Brozek, Jan L. ;
Akl, Elie A. ;
Bossuyt, Patrick ;
Churchill, Rachel ;
Glenton, Claire ;
Rosenbaum, Sarah ;
Tugwell, Peter ;
Welch, Vivian ;
Garner, Paul ;
Guyatt, Gordon ;
Schunemann, Holger J. .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2016, 74 :7-18
[8]   Motivated Processing: How People Perceive News Covering Novel or Contradictory Health Research Findings [J].
Chang, Chingching .
SCIENCE COMMUNICATION, 2015, 37 (05) :602-634
[9]   Neutralizing misinformation through inoculation: Exposing misleading argumentation techniques reduces their influence [J].
Cook, John ;
Lewandowsky, Stephan ;
Ecker, Ullrich K. H. .
PLOS ONE, 2017, 12 (05)
[10]   Why don't well-educated adults understand accumulation? A challenge to researchers, educators, and citizens [J].
Cronin, Matthew A. ;
Gonzalez, Cleotilde ;
Sterman, John D. .
ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND HUMAN DECISION PROCESSES, 2009, 108 (01) :116-130