IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v40y2020i5p680-692.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Effect of Information Formats and Incidental Affect on Prior and Posterior Probability Judgments

Author

Listed:
  • Bonnie A. Armstrong

    (International Centre for Surgical Safety, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael’s Hospital, Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada)

  • Erika P. Sparrow

    (Department of Psychology, Ryerson University, Toronto, ON, Canada)

  • Julia Spaniol

    (Department of Psychology, Ryerson University, Toronto, ON, Canada)

Abstract

Background . Interpreting medical test results involves judging probabilities, including making Bayesian inferences such as judging the positive and negative predictive values. Although prior work has shown that experience formats (e.g., slide shows of representative patient cases) produce more accurate Bayesian inferences than description formats (e.g., verbal statistical summaries), there are disadvantages of using the experience format for real-world medical decision making that may be solved by presenting relevant information in a 2 × 2 table format. Furthermore, medical decisions are often made in stressful contexts, yet little is known about the influence of acute stress on the accuracy of Bayesian inferences. This study aimed to a) replicate the description-experience format effect on probabilistic judgments; b) examine judgment accuracy across description, experience, and a new 2 × 2 table format; and c) assess the effect of acute stress on probability judgments. Method . The study employed a 2 (stress condition) × 3 (format) factorial between-subjects design. Participants ( N = 165) completed a Bayesian inference task in which information about a medical screening test was presented in 1 of 3 formats (description, experience, 2 × 2 table), following a laboratory stress induction or a no-stress control condition. Results . Overall, the 2 × 2 table format produced the most accurate probability judgments, including Bayesian inferences, compared with the description and experience formats. Stress had no effect on judgment accuracy. Discussion . Given its accuracy and practicality, a 2 × 2 table may be better suited than description or experience formats for communicating probabilistic information in medical contexts.

Suggested Citation

  • Bonnie A. Armstrong & Erika P. Sparrow & Julia Spaniol, 2020. "The Effect of Information Formats and Incidental Affect on Prior and Posterior Probability Judgments," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 40(5), pages 680-692, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:40:y:2020:i:5:p:680-692
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X20938056
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X20938056
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X20938056?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. Erika A. Waters, 2008. "Feeling good, feeling bad, and feeling at-risk: a review of incidental affect's influence on likelihood estimates of health hazards and life events," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(5), pages 569-595, July.
    2. Tadeusz Tyszka & Przemyslaw Sawicki, 2011. "Affective and Cognitive Factors Influencing Sensitivity to Probabilistic Information," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(11), pages 1832-1845, November.
    3. repec:cup:judgdm:v:7:y:2012:i:1:p:25-47 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Jennifer L. Cerully & William M.P. Klein, 2010. "Effects of emotional state on behavioral responsiveness to personal risk feedback," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(5), pages 591-598, July.
    2. Jounghwa Choi & Kyung-Hee Kim, 2022. "The Differential Consequences of Fear, Anger, and Depression in Response to COVID-19 in South Korea," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-13, May.
    3. V.H.M. Visschers & P.M. Wiedemann & H. Gutscher & S. Kurzenhäuser & R. Seidl & C.G. Jardine & D.R.M. Timmermans, 2012. "Affect-inducing risk communication: current knowledge and future directions," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(3), pages 257-271, March.
    4. Julija Michailova & Tadeusz Tyszka & Katarzyna Pfeifer, 2017. "Are People Interested in Probabilities of Natural Disasters?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(5), pages 1005-1017, May.
    5. John T. Brady, 2012. "Health risk perceptions across time in the USA," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(6), pages 547-563, June.
    6. Bonnie Armstrong & Julia Spaniol, 2017. "Experienced Probabilities Increase Understanding of Diagnostic Test Results in Younger and Older Adults," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 37(6), pages 670-679, August.
    7. Xiao‐Fei Xie & Mei Wang & Ruo‐Gu Zhang & Jie Li & Qing‐Yuan Yu, 2011. "The Role of Emotions in Risk Communication," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(3), pages 450-465, March.

    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:40:y:2020:i:5:p:680-692. 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.