Garcia-Retamero Rocio, Cokely Edward T, Hoffrage Ulrich
Department of Experimental Psychology, Facultad de Psicología, University of Granada , Granada, Spain, ; Department of Cognitive and Learning Sciences, Michigan Technological University , Houghton, MI, USA ; Max Planck Institute for Human Development , Berlin, Germany.
National Institute for Risk and Resilience, University of Oklahoma , Norman, OK, USA ; Department of Cognitive and Learning Sciences, Michigan Technological University , Houghton, MI, USA ; Max Planck Institute for Human Development , Berlin, Germany.
Front Psychol. 2015 Jul 16;6:932. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00932. eCollection 2015.
Visual aids can improve comprehension of risks associated with medical treatments, screenings, and lifestyles. Do visual aids also help decision makers accurately assess their risk comprehension? That is, do visual aids help them become well calibrated? To address these questions, we investigated the benefits of visual aids displaying numerical information and measured accuracy of self-assessment of diagnostic inferences (i.e., metacognitive judgment calibration) controlling for individual differences in numeracy. Participants included 108 patients who made diagnostic inferences about three medical tests on the basis of information about the sensitivity and false-positive rate of the tests and disease prevalence. Half of the patients received the information in numbers without a visual aid, while the other half received numbers along with a grid representing the numerical information. In the numerical condition, many patients-especially those with low numeracy-misinterpreted the predictive value of the tests and profoundly overestimated the accuracy of their inferences. Metacognitive judgment calibration mediated the relationship between numeracy and accuracy of diagnostic inferences. In contrast, in the visual aid condition, patients at all levels of numeracy showed high-levels of inferential accuracy and metacognitive judgment calibration. Results indicate that accurate metacognitive assessment may explain the beneficial effects of visual aids and numeracy-a result that accords with theory suggesting that metacognition is an essential part of risk literacy. We conclude that well-designed risk communications can inform patients about healthrelevant numerical information while helping them assess the quality of their own risk comprehension.
视觉辅助工具可以提高对与医学治疗、筛查和生活方式相关风险的理解。视觉辅助工具是否也有助于决策者准确评估他们对风险的理解呢？也就是说，视觉辅助工具是否能帮助他们进行良好的校准呢？为了解决这些问题，我们研究了展示数字信息的视觉辅助工具的益处，并在控制了个体在数字能力方面差异的情况下，测量了诊断推理自我评估的准确性（即元认知判断校准）。参与者包括108名患者，他们根据关于测试的敏感度、假阳性率和疾病患病率的信息，对三项医学测试进行诊断推理。一半患者收到的信息是数字形式，没有视觉辅助工具，而另一半患者收到的数字信息配有一个代表这些数字信息的网格。在数字条件下，许多患者——尤其是那些数字能力较低的患者——误解了测试的预测价值，并严重高估了他们推理的准确性。元认知判断校准介导了数字能力与诊断推理准确性之间的关系。相比之下，在视觉辅助工具条件下，所有数字能力水平的患者都表现出高水平的推理准确性和元认知判断校准。结果表明，准确的元认知评估可能解释了视觉辅助工具和数字能力的有益效果——这一结果与认为元认知是风险素养重要组成部分的理论相符。我们得出结论，精心设计的风险沟通可以让患者了解与健康相关的数字信息，同时帮助他们评估自己对风险理解的质量。
Zotero 插件
