Cargando…
The Impact of Information Presentation and Cognitive Dissonance on Processing Systematic Review Summaries: A Randomized Controlled Trial on Bicycle Helmet Legislation
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 informati...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9140747/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35627776 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19106234 |
_version_ | 1784715173666226176 |
---|---|
author | Béchard, Benoît Kimmerle, Joachim Lawarée, Justin Bédard, Pierre-Oliver Straus, Sharon E. Ouimet, Mathieu |
author_facet | Béchard, Benoît Kimmerle, Joachim Lawarée, Justin Bédard, Pierre-Oliver Straus, Sharon E. Ouimet, Mathieu |
author_sort | Béchard, Benoît |
collection | PubMed |
description | 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. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9140747 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-91407472022-05-28 The Impact of Information Presentation and Cognitive Dissonance on Processing Systematic Review Summaries: A Randomized Controlled Trial on Bicycle Helmet Legislation Béchard, Benoît Kimmerle, Joachim Lawarée, Justin Bédard, Pierre-Oliver Straus, Sharon E. Ouimet, Mathieu Int J Environ Res Public Health Article 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. MDPI 2022-05-20 /pmc/articles/PMC9140747/ /pubmed/35627776 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19106234 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Béchard, Benoît Kimmerle, Joachim Lawarée, Justin Bédard, Pierre-Oliver Straus, Sharon E. Ouimet, Mathieu The Impact of Information Presentation and Cognitive Dissonance on Processing Systematic Review Summaries: A Randomized Controlled Trial on Bicycle Helmet Legislation |
title | The Impact of Information Presentation and Cognitive Dissonance on Processing Systematic Review Summaries: A Randomized Controlled Trial on Bicycle Helmet Legislation |
title_full | The Impact of Information Presentation and Cognitive Dissonance on Processing Systematic Review Summaries: A Randomized Controlled Trial on Bicycle Helmet Legislation |
title_fullStr | The Impact of Information Presentation and Cognitive Dissonance on Processing Systematic Review Summaries: A Randomized Controlled Trial on Bicycle Helmet Legislation |
title_full_unstemmed | The Impact of Information Presentation and Cognitive Dissonance on Processing Systematic Review Summaries: A Randomized Controlled Trial on Bicycle Helmet Legislation |
title_short | The Impact of Information Presentation and Cognitive Dissonance on Processing Systematic Review Summaries: A Randomized Controlled Trial on Bicycle Helmet Legislation |
title_sort | impact of information presentation and cognitive dissonance on processing systematic review summaries: a randomized controlled trial on bicycle helmet legislation |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9140747/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35627776 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19106234 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT bechardbenoit theimpactofinformationpresentationandcognitivedissonanceonprocessingsystematicreviewsummariesarandomizedcontrolledtrialonbicyclehelmetlegislation AT kimmerlejoachim theimpactofinformationpresentationandcognitivedissonanceonprocessingsystematicreviewsummariesarandomizedcontrolledtrialonbicyclehelmetlegislation AT lawareejustin theimpactofinformationpresentationandcognitivedissonanceonprocessingsystematicreviewsummariesarandomizedcontrolledtrialonbicyclehelmetlegislation AT bedardpierreoliver theimpactofinformationpresentationandcognitivedissonanceonprocessingsystematicreviewsummariesarandomizedcontrolledtrialonbicyclehelmetlegislation AT straussharone theimpactofinformationpresentationandcognitivedissonanceonprocessingsystematicreviewsummariesarandomizedcontrolledtrialonbicyclehelmetlegislation AT ouimetmathieu theimpactofinformationpresentationandcognitivedissonanceonprocessingsystematicreviewsummariesarandomizedcontrolledtrialonbicyclehelmetlegislation AT bechardbenoit impactofinformationpresentationandcognitivedissonanceonprocessingsystematicreviewsummariesarandomizedcontrolledtrialonbicyclehelmetlegislation AT kimmerlejoachim impactofinformationpresentationandcognitivedissonanceonprocessingsystematicreviewsummariesarandomizedcontrolledtrialonbicyclehelmetlegislation AT lawareejustin impactofinformationpresentationandcognitivedissonanceonprocessingsystematicreviewsummariesarandomizedcontrolledtrialonbicyclehelmetlegislation AT bedardpierreoliver impactofinformationpresentationandcognitivedissonanceonprocessingsystematicreviewsummariesarandomizedcontrolledtrialonbicyclehelmetlegislation AT straussharone impactofinformationpresentationandcognitivedissonanceonprocessingsystematicreviewsummariesarandomizedcontrolledtrialonbicyclehelmetlegislation AT ouimetmathieu impactofinformationpresentationandcognitivedissonanceonprocessingsystematicreviewsummariesarandomizedcontrolledtrialonbicyclehelmetlegislation |