Understanding the Effect of Information Presentation Order and Orientation on Information Search and Treatment Evaluation

Claire Louise Heard, Tim Rakow and Tom Foulsham
Additional contact information
Claire Louise Heard: Department of Psychology, King’s College London, London, UK
Tim Rakow: Department of Psychology, King’s College London, London, UK
Tom Foulsham: Department of Psychology, University of Essex, Colchester, UK

Medical Decision Making, 2018, vol. 38, issue 6, 646-657

Abstract: Background. Past research finds that treatment evaluations are more negative when risks are presented after benefits. This study investigates this order effect: manipulating tabular orientation and order of risk–benefit information, and examining information search order and gaze duration via eye-tracking. Design. 108 (Study 1) and 44 (Study 2) participants viewed information about treatment risks and benefits, in either a horizontal (left-right) or vertical (above-below) orientation, with the benefits or risks presented first (left side or at top). For 4 scenarios, participants answered 6 treatment evaluation questions (1–7 scales) that were combined into overall evaluation scores. In addition, Study 2 collected eye-tracking data during the benefit–risk presentation. Results. Participants tended to read one set of information (i.e., all risks or all benefits) before transitioning to the other. Analysis of order of fixations showed this tendency was stronger in the vertical (standardized mean rank difference further from 0, M  = ± .88) than horizontal orientation ( M  = ± 0.71). Approximately 50% of the time was spent reading benefits when benefits were shown first, but this was reduced to ~40% when risks were presented first (regression coefficient: B = −4.52, p

Keywords: choices; evaluation; eye-tracking; gaze bias; health; risk–benefit (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2018
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X18785356 (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:sae:medema:v:38:y:2018:i:6:p:646-657

DOI: 10.1177/0272989X18785356

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Medical Decision Making
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().