Department of Work and Social Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Neuroscience, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
School of Medicine, Department of Surgery (Division of Public Health Sciences), Washington University in Saint Louis, Campus Box 8100, 600 S. Euclid Ave, Saint Louis, MO, 63110, USA.
J Behav Med. 2018 Jun;41(3):318-332. doi: 10.1007/s10865-017-9894-3. Epub 2017 Oct 13.
A single risk factor can increase the risk of developing multiple diseases, but most risk communication research has been conducted in the context of a single disease. We explored which combination of three recommended risk communication strategies is most effective in simultaneously conveying risk estimates of four diseases associated with physical inactivity: colon cancer, stroke, diabetes, and heart disease. Participants (N = 1161, 50% no college experience, 50% racial/ethnic minority) were shown hypothetical risk estimates for each of the four diseases. All four diseases were placed at varying heights on 1 of 12 vertical bar charts (i.e., "risk ladders") to indicate their respective probabilities. The risk ladders varied in a 2 (risk reduction information: present/absent) × 2 (numerical format: words/words and numbers) × 3 (social comparison information: none/somewhat higher than average/much higher than average) full factorial design. Participants were randomly assigned to view one of the risk ladders and then completed a questionnaire assessing message comprehension, message acceptance, physical activity-related risk and efficacy beliefs, and physical activity intentions. Higher message acceptance was found among (1) people who received risk reduction information versus those who did not (p = .01), and (2) people who did not receive social comparison information versus those told that they were at higher than average risk (p = .03). Further, absolute cognitive perceived risk of developing "any of the diseases shown in the picture" was higher among people who did not receive social comparison information (p = .03). No other main effects and only very few interactions with demographic variables were found. Combining recommended risk communication strategies did not improve or impair key cognitive or affective precursors of health behavior change. It might not be necessary to provide people with extensive information when communicating risk estimates of multiple diseases.
单一风险因素会增加多种疾病的发病风险，但大多数风险沟通研究都是针对单一疾病进行的。我们探讨了同时传达与身体活动不足相关的四种疾病（结肠癌、中风、糖尿病和心脏病）的风险估计值时，以下三种推荐的风险沟通策略组合中哪一种最有效：
风险降低信息：有/无；
数值格式：仅文字/文字和数字；
社会比较信息：无/稍高于平均水平/远高于平均水平。
参与者（N=1161，50%无大学学历，50%为少数族裔）观看了四种疾病中每一种疾病的假设风险估计值。将所有四种疾病放置在 12 个垂直条形图（即“风险阶梯”）中的 1 个上，以表示各自的概率。风险阶梯在 2（风险降低信息：有/无）×2（数值格式：仅文字/文字和数字）×3（社会比较信息：无/稍高于平均水平/远高于平均水平）完全因子设计中有所不同。参与者被随机分配观看其中一个风险阶梯，然后完成一份评估信息理解、信息接受、与身体活动相关的风险和效能信念以及身体活动意向的问卷。
与未收到风险降低信息的人相比，收到风险降低信息的人（p=0.01）和
与被告知风险高于平均水平的人相比，未收到社会比较信息的人（p=0.03），其信息接受度更高。
此外，与收到社会比较信息的人相比（p=0.03），未收到社会比较信息的人对“图片中显示的任何一种疾病”的绝对认知感知风险更高。未发现其他主要影响，只有少数与人口统计学变量的交互作用。综合推荐的风险沟通策略并没有改善或损害健康行为改变的关键认知或情感前体。在传达多种疾病的风险估计值时，可能没有必要向人们提供广泛的信息。
