IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v37y2017i3p230-238.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Subjective Numeracy and the Influence of Order and Amount of Audible Information on Perceived Medication Value

Author

Listed:
  • Liana Fraenkel
  • Marilyn Stolar
  • Sarah Swift
  • Richard L. Street Jr.
  • Harjinder Chowdhary
  • Ellen Peters

Abstract

Background . Order and amount of information influence patients’ risk perceptions, but most studies have evaluated patients’ reactions to written materials. The objective of this study was to examine the effect of 4 communication strategies, varying in their order and/or amount of information, on judgments related to an audible description of a new medication and among patients who varied in subjective numeracy. Methods . We created 5 versions of a hypothetical scenario describing a new medication. The versions were composed to elucidate whether order and/or amount of the information describing benefits and adverse events influenced how subjects valued a new medication. After listening to a randomly assigned version, perceived medication value was measured by asking subjects to choose one of the following statements: the risks outweigh the benefits, the risks and benefits are equally balanced, or the benefits outweigh the risks. Results . Of the 432 patients contacted, 389 participated in the study. Listening to a brief description of benefits followed by an extended description of adverse events resulted in a greater likelihood of perceiving that the medication’s benefits outweighed the risks compared with 1) presenting the extended adverse events description before the benefits, 2) giving a greater amount of information related to benefits, and 3) sandwiching the adverse events between benefits. These associations were only observed among subjects with average or higher subjective numeracy. Conclusion . If confirmed in future studies, our results suggest that, for patients with average or better subjective numeracy, perceived medication value is highest when a brief presentation of benefits is followed by an extended description of adverse events.

Suggested Citation

  • Liana Fraenkel & Marilyn Stolar & Sarah Swift & Richard L. Street Jr. & Harjinder Chowdhary & Ellen Peters, 2017. "Subjective Numeracy and the Influence of Order and Amount of Audible Information on Perceived Medication Value," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 37(3), pages 230-238, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:37:y:2017:i:3:p:230-238
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X16650665
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X16650665
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X16650665?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Unnava, H Rao & Burnkrant, Robert E & Erevelles, Sunil, 1994. "Effects of Presentation Order and Communication Modality on Recall and Attitude," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 21(3), pages 481-490, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Heribert Gierl & Hans Höser, 2002. "Der Reihenfolgeeffekt auf Präferenzen," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 54(1), pages 3-18, February.
    2. Joshua J. Clarkson & Alan D. J. Cooke & Nathanael S. Martin, 2023. "Great expectations: argument order expectations shape the efficacy of order effects in one-sided advertisements," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 383-395, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:37:y:2017:i:3:p:230-238. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.