Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31142300›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2019

Testing verbal quantifiers for social norms messages in cancer screening: evidence from an online experiment.

Sandro T Stoffel, Maria Goodwin, Monika Sieverding, Ivo Vlaev, Christian von Wagner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Sandro T StoffelResearch Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT, UK.
Maria GoodwinResearch Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT, UK.
Monika SieverdingInstitute of Psychology, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, 69117, Germany.
Ivo VlaevWarwick Business School, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL, UK.
Christian von WagnerResearch Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT, UK. c.wagner@ucl.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7971-0691

Funding

Cancer Research UK 14134Cancer Research UK C1418/A14134
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStudies have shown that presenting correct information about group norms to correct misperceptions of norms can influence health behaviours. In two online studies we investigated how different ways of communicating the current uptake of 43% of the English Bowel Scope Screening (BSS) programme affects intention among disinclined men and women.

methodsIn the first study, 202 participants were asked to interpret eight quantifiers for 43% uptake ('few', 'many', 'a considerable number', 'a large number', 'a great number', 'a lot', 'numerous' and 'nearly half') and to indicate how misleading they perceived each of them to be. In the second study, with 1245 participants, we compared the motivational impact of two quantifiers ('a large number' and 'nearly half' which were associated with the highest perceived uptake (48.9%) and considered least misleading in study 1 respectively) with a control message that did not contain any information on uptake, and a message which communicated actual uptake as a proportion (43%).

resultsWhile we found that both verbal quantifiers increased screening intentions compared with the control group (from 7.8 to 12.5%, aOR 1.72; 95%CI 1.00-2.96 in the case of 'a large number' and 14.3%, aOR 2.02; 95%CI 1.20-3.38 for 'nearly half'), simply communicating that 43% do the test, however, had no impact on intentions (9.9% vs. 7.8% aOR 1.25; 95%CI 0.73-2.16).

conclusionVerbal quantifiers can be used to improve the perception of low uptake figures and avoid a demotivating effect.

Indexed as

Social NormsAdultEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHealth CommunicationHumansIntentionInternetMaleMiddle AgedMotivationNeoplasmsPerceptionCancer screeningDecision makingNudgeOnline experimentQuantifiersSocial norms

Identifiers

PMID31142300
PMCPMC6542069

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.