Communicating Uncertainties About the Effects of Medical Interventions Using Different Display Formats

Research output: Journal contributionsJournal articlesResearchpeer-review

Authors

Communicating uncertainties in scientific evidence is important to accurately reflect scientific knowledge, increase public understanding of uncertainty, and to signal transparency and honesty in reporting. While techniques have been developed to facilitate the communication of uncertainty, many have not been empirically tested, compared for communicating different types of uncertainty, or their effects on different cognitive, trust, and behavioral outcomes have not been evaluated. The present study examined how a point estimate, imprecise estimate, conflicting estimates, or a statement about the lack of evidence about treatment effects, influenced participant's responses to communications about medical evidence. For each type of uncertainty, we adapted three display formats to communicate the information: tables, bar graphs, and icon arrays. We compared participant's best estimates of treatment effects, as well as effects on recall, subjective evaluations (understandability and usefuleness), certainty perceptions, perceptions of trustworthiness of the information, and behavioral intentions. We did not find any detrimental effects from communicating imprecision or conflicting estimates relative to a point estimate across any outcome. Furthermore, there were more favorable responses to communicating imprecision or conflicting estimates relative to lack of evidence, where participants estimated the treatment would improve outcomes by 30–50% relative to a placebo. There were no differences across display formats, suggesting that, if well-designed, it may not matter which format is used. Future research on specific display formats or uncertainty types and with larger sample sizes would be needed to detect small effects. Implications for the communication of uncertainty are discussed.

Original languageEnglish
JournalRisk Analysis
Volume41
Issue number12
Pages (from-to)2220-2239
Number of pages20
ISSN0272-4332
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 01.12.2021
Externally publishedYes

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 The Authors. Risk Analysis published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society for Risk Analysis

DOI

Recently viewed

Activities

  1. Grünes Design allein reicht nicht mehr
  2. Optimization of solid phase extraction of Beta-blockers from hospital effluent by Response Surface Methodology
  3. Comparative Perspectives on Social Values and Modernization - 2011
  4. Resource strategies for a sustainable use of critical metals – A framework for the evaluation of their sustainability potential considering their time frames and regulative level
  5. Shift Festival - 2010
  6. Universität Boston
  7. 1st conference of the COST Action IS0906 "Transforming Audiences, Transforming Societies" - COST ISO0906 2011
  8. Optimization of solid phase extraction of Beta-blockers from hospital effluent by Response Surface Methodology
  9. Erst studieren oder erst probieren: Wie können Core Practices in der Lehrer*innenbildung effektiv vermittelt werden?
  10. Improving skills. Evidence from secondary analysis of international surveys 2012
  11. The Influence of Reputation on Travel Desicions in the Internet
  12. Facebook use of elementary school students’. A qualitative study about the use of Facebook in everyday life of children
  13. Conference - 8th Entrepreneurship-as-Practice Conference
  14. Visual Culture Revisited. German and American Perspectives on Visual Culture(s)
  15. Kinderliterarisches Übersetzen
  16. Children’s Literature in Language Teaching 2004
  17. Herausforderung Sprache im Fach
  18. Seminar für Mathematik und ihre Didaktik
  19. Why companies do district heating – the business model perspective on network expansion and renewable sources of energy
  20. Struggling Agents: Between Crisis and Creation