ArticleHealth communication2014
Social comparison framing in health news and its effect on perceptions of group risk.
Article in Health communication, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Public and Private Information Sharing under "New Normal" of COVID-19: Understanding the Roles of Habit and Outcome Expectation.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Effectively Communicating About HIV and Other Health Disparities: Findings From a Literature Review and Future Directions.Frontiers in communication · 2020Article
- 30+ years of media analysis of relevance to chronic disease: a scoping review.BMC public health · 2020Article
- Using fuzzy-trace theory to understand and improve health judgments, decisions, and behaviors: A literature review.Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
News about health disparities often compares health risks faced by different demographic groups. Does this social comparison produce a contrast effect? It was hypothesized that when two racial groups are compared, people would perceive the relatively more at-risk group to be more, and the less at-risk group to be less, at-risk than if the same risk information was presented without the comparative reference group. Three experiments with Black and White respondents tested effects of intergroup social comparison framing (SCF) on perceptions of risk for sexually transmitted infections and skin cancer. SCF (including one White and two Black disparity frames) did not raise respondents' perceived risk regarding the more at-risk racial group, but consistently lowered respondents' risk ratings for the less at-risk racial group. The finding that the same statistic was perceived differently in comparative and noncomparative contexts underscores the importance of considering effects of communication about disparities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.