Cargando…

How to Put It Plainly? Findings From Two Randomized Controlled Studies on Writing Plain Language Summaries for Psychological Meta-Analyses

Plain language summaries (PLS) aim to communicate research findings to laypersons in an easily understandable manner. Despite the societal relevance of making psychological research findings available to the public, our empirical knowledge on how to write PLS of psychology studies is still scarce. I...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kerwer, Martin, Stoll, Marlene, Jonas, Mark, Benz, Gesa, Chasiotis, Anita
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8717946/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34975663
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.771399
_version_ 1784624617990651904
author Kerwer, Martin
Stoll, Marlene
Jonas, Mark
Benz, Gesa
Chasiotis, Anita
author_facet Kerwer, Martin
Stoll, Marlene
Jonas, Mark
Benz, Gesa
Chasiotis, Anita
author_sort Kerwer, Martin
collection PubMed
description Plain language summaries (PLS) aim to communicate research findings to laypersons in an easily understandable manner. Despite the societal relevance of making psychological research findings available to the public, our empirical knowledge on how to write PLS of psychology studies is still scarce. In this article, we present two experimental studies investigating six characteristics of PLS for psychological meta-analyses. We specifically focused on approaches for (1) handling technical terms, (2) communicating the quality of evidence by explaining the methodological approach of meta-analyses, (3) explaining how synthesized studies operationalized their research questions, (4) handling statistical terms, (5) structuring PLS, and (6) explaining complex meta-analytic designs. To develop empirically validated guidelines on writing PLS, two randomized controlled studies including large samples stratified for education status, age, and gender (N(Study1)=2,288 and N(Study2)=2,211) were conducted. Eight PLS of meta-analyses from different areas of psychology were investigated as study materials. Main outcome variables were user experience (i.e., perceived accessibility, perceived understanding, and perceived empowerment) and knowledge acquisition, as well as understanding and knowledge of the quality of evidence. Overall, our hypotheses were partially confirmed, with our results underlining, among other things, the importance of explaining or replacing content-related technical terms (i.e., theoretical concepts) and indicating the detrimental effects of providing too many details on statistical concepts on user experience. Drawing on these and further findings, we derive five empirically well-founded rules on the lay-friendly communication of meta-analytic research findings in psychology. Implications for PLS authors and future research on PLS are discussed.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8717946
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-87179462021-12-31 How to Put It Plainly? Findings From Two Randomized Controlled Studies on Writing Plain Language Summaries for Psychological Meta-Analyses Kerwer, Martin Stoll, Marlene Jonas, Mark Benz, Gesa Chasiotis, Anita Front Psychol Psychology Plain language summaries (PLS) aim to communicate research findings to laypersons in an easily understandable manner. Despite the societal relevance of making psychological research findings available to the public, our empirical knowledge on how to write PLS of psychology studies is still scarce. In this article, we present two experimental studies investigating six characteristics of PLS for psychological meta-analyses. We specifically focused on approaches for (1) handling technical terms, (2) communicating the quality of evidence by explaining the methodological approach of meta-analyses, (3) explaining how synthesized studies operationalized their research questions, (4) handling statistical terms, (5) structuring PLS, and (6) explaining complex meta-analytic designs. To develop empirically validated guidelines on writing PLS, two randomized controlled studies including large samples stratified for education status, age, and gender (N(Study1)=2,288 and N(Study2)=2,211) were conducted. Eight PLS of meta-analyses from different areas of psychology were investigated as study materials. Main outcome variables were user experience (i.e., perceived accessibility, perceived understanding, and perceived empowerment) and knowledge acquisition, as well as understanding and knowledge of the quality of evidence. Overall, our hypotheses were partially confirmed, with our results underlining, among other things, the importance of explaining or replacing content-related technical terms (i.e., theoretical concepts) and indicating the detrimental effects of providing too many details on statistical concepts on user experience. Drawing on these and further findings, we derive five empirically well-founded rules on the lay-friendly communication of meta-analytic research findings in psychology. Implications for PLS authors and future research on PLS are discussed. Frontiers Media S.A. 2021-12-16 /pmc/articles/PMC8717946/ /pubmed/34975663 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.771399 Text en Copyright © 2021 Kerwer, Stoll, Jonas, Benz and Chasiotis. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Psychology
Kerwer, Martin
Stoll, Marlene
Jonas, Mark
Benz, Gesa
Chasiotis, Anita
How to Put It Plainly? Findings From Two Randomized Controlled Studies on Writing Plain Language Summaries for Psychological Meta-Analyses
title How to Put It Plainly? Findings From Two Randomized Controlled Studies on Writing Plain Language Summaries for Psychological Meta-Analyses
title_full How to Put It Plainly? Findings From Two Randomized Controlled Studies on Writing Plain Language Summaries for Psychological Meta-Analyses
title_fullStr How to Put It Plainly? Findings From Two Randomized Controlled Studies on Writing Plain Language Summaries for Psychological Meta-Analyses
title_full_unstemmed How to Put It Plainly? Findings From Two Randomized Controlled Studies on Writing Plain Language Summaries for Psychological Meta-Analyses
title_short How to Put It Plainly? Findings From Two Randomized Controlled Studies on Writing Plain Language Summaries for Psychological Meta-Analyses
title_sort how to put it plainly? findings from two randomized controlled studies on writing plain language summaries for psychological meta-analyses
topic Psychology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8717946/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34975663
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.771399
work_keys_str_mv AT kerwermartin howtoputitplainlyfindingsfromtworandomizedcontrolledstudiesonwritingplainlanguagesummariesforpsychologicalmetaanalyses
AT stollmarlene howtoputitplainlyfindingsfromtworandomizedcontrolledstudiesonwritingplainlanguagesummariesforpsychologicalmetaanalyses
AT jonasmark howtoputitplainlyfindingsfromtworandomizedcontrolledstudiesonwritingplainlanguagesummariesforpsychologicalmetaanalyses
AT benzgesa howtoputitplainlyfindingsfromtworandomizedcontrolledstudiesonwritingplainlanguagesummariesforpsychologicalmetaanalyses
AT chasiotisanita howtoputitplainlyfindingsfromtworandomizedcontrolledstudiesonwritingplainlanguagesummariesforpsychologicalmetaanalyses