Processing fluency effects: Can the content and presentation of participant information sheets influence recruitment and participation for an antenatal intervention?

Andrew J  Manley; Tina Lavender; Debbie M Smith

doi:10.1016/j.pec.2014.11.005

Processing fluency effects: Can the content and presentation of participant information sheets influence recruitment and participation for an antenatal intervention?

Andrew J Manley, Tina Lavender, Debbie M Smith

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To assess the extent to which the title and font of participant information sheets (PISs) can influence pregnant women's and trainee midwives’ perceptions of an antenatal intervention.
Methods: Pregnant women (n = 35) and trainee midwives (n = 36) were randomly presented with one of four PISs where the title and font of the PIS had been manipulated to create four experimental conditions (i.e., Double Fluent; Double Awkward; Fluent Title-Awkward Font; Awkward Title-Fluent Font). After reading the PIS, participants rated their perceptions of the intervention (i.e., Attractiveness, Complexity, Expected Risk, Required Effort) using five-point Likert scales.
Results: A 4 × 2 factorial multivariate analysis of variance revealed that pregnant women rated the Double Awkward condition as significantly more complex than the Double Fluent (p = .024) and Awkward Title-Fluent Font (p = .021) conditions.
Conclusion: Font influenced pregnant women's ratings of intervention complexity.
Practice implications: Results have implications for ethical recruitment, and in turn, the optimisation of corresponding interventions.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	391-394
Number of pages	4
Journal	Journal of Patient Education and Counselling
Volume	98
Issue number	3
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2014.11.005
Publication status	Published - Mar 2015
Externally published	Yes

Keywords

Cognitive processes
intervention studies
judgement
participant recruitment
professional standards
research ethics

Access to Document

10.1016/j.pec.2014.11.005Licence: Unspecified

Cite this

@article{d30b94d2380b4e6ea67ee8555e9993b8,

title = "Processing fluency effects: Can the content and presentation of participant information sheets influence recruitment and participation for an antenatal intervention?",

abstract = "Objective: To assess the extent to which the title and font of participant information sheets (PISs) can influence pregnant women's and trainee midwives{\textquoteright} perceptions of an antenatal intervention.Methods: Pregnant women (n = 35) and trainee midwives (n = 36) were randomly presented with one of four PISs where the title and font of the PIS had been manipulated to create four experimental conditions (i.e., Double Fluent; Double Awkward; Fluent Title-Awkward Font; Awkward Title-Fluent Font). After reading the PIS, participants rated their perceptions of the intervention (i.e., Attractiveness, Complexity, Expected Risk, Required Effort) using five-point Likert scales.Results: A 4 × 2 factorial multivariate analysis of variance revealed that pregnant women rated the Double Awkward condition as significantly more complex than the Double Fluent (p = .024) and Awkward Title-Fluent Font (p = .021) conditions.Conclusion: Font influenced pregnant women's ratings of intervention complexity.Practice implications: Results have implications for ethical recruitment, and in turn, the optimisation of corresponding interventions.",

keywords = "Cognitive processes, intervention studies, judgement, participant recruitment, professional standards, research ethics",

author = "Manley, {Andrew J} and Tina Lavender and Smith, {Debbie M}",

year = "2015",

month = mar,

doi = "10.1016/j.pec.2014.11.005",

language = "English",

volume = "98",

pages = "391--394",

journal = "Journal of Patient Education and Counselling",

number = "3",