The Impact of Information Presentation and Cognitive Dissonance on Processing Systematic Review Summaries: A Randomized Controlled Trial on Bicycle Helmet Legislation

Benoît Béchard, Joachim Kimmerle, Justin Lawarée, Pierre-Oliver Bédard, Sharon E. Straus and Mathieu Ouimet
Additional contact information
Benoît Béchard: PolitiCo, School of Psychology, Université Laval, Québec, QC G1V 0A6, Canada
Joachim Kimmerle: Leibniz-Institut für Wissensmedien, 72076 Tübingen, Germany
Justin Lawarée: International Observatory on the Societal Impact of AI and Digital Technology, Department of Political Science, Université Laval, Québec, QC G1V 0A6, Canada
Pierre-Oliver Bédard: GC Experimentation Team, Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, Government of Canada, Ottawa, ON K1A OR5, Canada
Sharon E. Straus: Knowledge Translation Program, St. Michael’s Hospital, Toronto, ON M5B 1W8, Canada
Mathieu Ouimet: PolitiCo, Department of Political Science, Université Laval, Québec, QC G1V 0A6, Canada

IJERPH, 2022, vol. 19, issue 10, 1-17

Abstract: 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.

Keywords: cognitive dissonance; systematic review summary; bicycle helmet; methodological limitations; experiments (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/10/6234/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/10/6234/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:10:p:6234-:d:820264

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().