Bond, L., & Nolan, T. (2011). Making sense of perceptions of risk of diseases and vaccinations: A qualitative study combining models of health beliefs, decision-making and risk perception. BMC Public Health, 11(1), 943. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-11-943
Bürkner, P.-C. (2017). brms: An R package for Bayesian multilevel models using Stan. Journal of Statistical Software. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v080.i01
Bürkner, P.-C. (2018). Advanced Bayesian multilevel modeling with the R Package brms. The R Journal, 10(1), 395. https://doi.org/10.32614/RJ-2018-017
Carpenter, B., Gelman, A., Hoffman, M. D., Lee, D., Goodrich, B., Betancourt, M., Brubaker, M., Guo, J., Li, P., & Riddell, A. (2017). Stan: A probabilistic programming language. Journal of Statistical Software. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v076.i01
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2021). J&J/Janssen Update. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/JJUpdate.html
Dragicevic, P., & Jansen, Y. (2017). Blinded with science or informed by charts? A replication study. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 24(1), 781–790.
Fagerlin, A., Zikmund-Fisher, B. J., Ubel, P. A., Jankovic, A., Derry, H. A., & Smith, D. M. (2007). Measuring numeracy without a math test: development of the subjective numeracy scale. Medical Decision Making, 27(5), 672–680. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X07304449
Fansher, M., Adkins, T. J., & Shah, P. (2022). Graphs do not lead people to infer causation from correlation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied.
Funk, C., & Tyson, A. (2021). Growing Share of Americans Say They Plan To Get a COVID-19 Vaccine—or Already Have. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2021/03/05/growing-share-of-americans-say-they-plan-to-get-a-covid-19-vaccine-or-already-have/
Gabry, J., Simpson, D., Vehtari, A., Betancourt, M., & Gelman, A. (2019). Visualization in Bayesian workflow. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society), 182(2), 389–402. https://doi.org/10.1111/rssa.12378
Galesic, M., Garcia-Retamero, R., & Gigerenzer, G. (2009). Using icon arrays to communicate medical risks: Overcoming low numeracy. Health Psychology, 28(2), 210.
Garcia-Retamero, R., & Galesic, M. (2009). Communicating treatment risk reduction to people with low numeracy skills: a cross-cultural comparison. American Journal of Public Health, 99(12), 2196–2202.
Garcia-Retamero, R., & Galesic, M. (2010). Who proficts from visual aids: Overcoming challenges in people’s understanding of risks. Social Science & Medicine., 70(7), 1019–1025.
Garcia-Retamero, R., Galesic, M., & Gigerenzer, G. (2010). Do icon arrays help reduce denominator neglect? Medical Decision Making, 30(6), 672–684.
Garcia-Retamero, R., & Cokely, E. T. (2013). Communicating health risks with visual aids. Current Directions in Psychological Science., 22(5), 392–9.
Hawley, S. T., Zikmund-Fisher, B., Ubel, P., Jancovic, A., Lucas, T., & Fagerlin, A. (2008). The impact of the format of graphical presentation on health-related knowledge and treatment choices. Patient Education and Counseling, 73(3), 448–455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2008.07.023.
Kühberger, A., Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M., & Perner, J. (2002). Framing decisions: Hypothetical and real. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 89(2), 1162–1175.
Landy, D., Silbert, N., & Goldin, A. (2013). Estimating large numbers. Cognitive Science, 37(5), 775–799.
Makowski, D., Ben-Shachar, M. S., Chen, S. H. A., & Lüdecke, D. (2019). Indices of effect existence and significance in the Bayesian framework. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 2767. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02767
Okan, Y., Garcia-Retamero, R., Cokely, E. T., & Maldonado, A. (2012). Individual differences in graph literacy: Overcoming denominator neglect in risk comprehension. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 25, 390–401.
Padilla, L. M., Creem-Regehr, S. H., Hegarty, M., & Stefanucci, J. K. (2018). Decision making with visualizations: A cognitive framework across disciplines. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 3(1), 1–25.
Peters, E. (2012). Beyond comprehension: The role of numeracy in judgments and decisions. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21(1), 31–35. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721411429960
Philip Bump. (2021). The risk-reward calculus of the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, visualized. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/04/13/risk-reward-calculus-johnson-johnson-vaccine-visualized/
Recchia, G., Lawrence, A. C., & Freeman, A. L. (2022). Investigating the presentation of uncertainty in an icon array: A randomized trial. PEC Innovation, 1, 100003.
Reyna, V. F. (2004). How people make decisions that involve risk: A dual-processes approach. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 13(2), 60–66. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0963-7214.2004.00275.x
Reyna, V. F. (2008). A theory of medical decision making and health: Fuzzy trace theory. Medical Decision Making, 28(6), 850–865. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272989X08327066
Reyna, V. F., & Brainerd, C. J. (2008). Numeracy, ratio bias, and denominator neglect in judgments of risk and probability. Learning and Individual Differences, 18(1), 89–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2007.03.011
Ruiz, J. G., Andrade, A. D., Garcia-Retamero, R., Anam, R., Rodriguez, R., & Sharit, J. (2013). Communicating global cardiovascular risk: Are icon arrays better than numerical estimates in improving understanding, recall and perception of risk? Patient Education and Counseling, 93(3), 394–402.
Slovic, P & Weber, E.U. (2002, April 12-13). Perception of risk posed by extreme events [Paper presentation]. Risk Management strategies in an Uncertain World, Palisades, New York, USA. https://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/chrr/documents/meetings/roundtable/white_papers/slovic_wp.pdf.
Slovic, P., & Weber, E. (2010). Perception of risk posed by extreme events. In J. S. Applegate, J. G. Laitos, J. M. Gaba, and N. M. Sachs (Eds.), Regulation of Toxic Substances and Hazardous Waste (2nd edition). Foundation Press.
Slovic, P., Monahan, J., & MacGregor, D. G. (2000). Violence risk assessment and risk communication: The effects of using actual cases, providing instruction, and employing probability versus frequency formats. Law and Human Behavior, 24(3), 271–296. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005595519944
Tait, A. R., Voepel-Lewis, T., Zikmund-Fisher, B. J., & Fagerlin, A. (2010). The effect of format on parents’ understanding of the risks and benefits of clinical research: A comparison between text, tables, and graphics. Journal of Health Communication, 15(5), 487–501. https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2010.492560
Tal, A., & Wansink, B. (2016). Blinded with science: Trivial graphs and formulas increase ad persuasiveness and belief in product efficacy. Public Understanding of Science, 25(1), 117–125.
Vehtari, A., Gelman, A., & Gabry, J. (2017). Practical Bayesian model evaluation using leave-one-out cross-validation and WAIC. Statistics and Computing, 27(5), 1413–1432. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11222-016-9696-4
Vehtari, A., Gelman, A., Simpson, D., Carpenter, B., & Bürkner, P. C. (2021). Rank-normalization, folding, and localization: An improved ̂R for assessing convergence of MCMC (with Discussion). Bayesian analysis, 16(2), 667–718.
Walker, A. C., Stange, M., Dixon, M. J., Fugelsang, J. A., & Koehler, D. J. (2022). Using icon arrays to communicate gambling information reduces the appeal of scratch card games. Journal of Gambling Studies, 1–20.
Waters, E. A., Weinstein, N. D., Colditz, G. A., & Emmons, K. M. (2007a). Reducing aversion to side effects in preventive medical treatment decisions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 13(1), 11–21. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-898X.13.1.11
Waters, E. A., Weinstein, N. D., Colditz, G. A., & Emmons, K. M. (2007b). Aversion to side effects in preventive medical treatment decisions. British Journal of Health Psychology, 12(3), 383–401.
Zikmund-Fisher, B. J., Ubel, P. A., Smith, D. M., Derry, H. A., McClure, J. B., Stark, A., Pitsch, R. K., & Fagerlin, A. (2008). Communicating side effect risks in a tamoxifen prophylaxis decision aid: the debiasing influence of pictographs. Patient Education and Counseling, 73(2), 209–214.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Disclaimer:
This article is autogenerated using RSS feeds and has not been created or edited by OA JF.
Click here for Source link (https://www.springeropen.com/)