We conducted an experiment to examine whether risk perceptions of alcohol-attributable cancer influence college students’ binge-drinking intention and to explore how message formats (text, table, and graph) and numeracy influence risk perceptions of alcohol-attributable cancer. We found that a majority of participants (87%) perceive some risks of alcohol-attributable cancer. Risk messages in tabular and graphic formats are more effective in elevating risk perceptions, but there is no significant difference between these two formats. Numeracy and its interaction with message formats, however, do not predict risk perceptions. We recommend risk messages should be delivered using tabular or graphic formats to enhance risk perceptions. We also advocate the less-is-more principle in presenting risk information.
AyersB.MyersL. B. (2012) Do media messages change people’s risk perceptions for binge drinking?Alcohol and Alcoholism47: 52–56. doi:10.1093/alcalc/agr052.
2.
Bazargan-HejaziS.GainesT.DuanN.CherpitelC. J. (2007) Correlates of injury among ED visits: Effects of alcohol, risk perception, impulsivity, and sensation seeking behaviors. American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse33: 101–108.
3.
BernhardtJ. M.CameronK. A. (2003) Accessing, understanding, and applying health communication messages: The challenge of health literacy. In: ThompsonT. L.DorseyA. M.MillerK. I.ParrottR. (eds) Handbook of health communication, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, pp. 583–605.
4.
BrewerN. T.GibbonsF. X.GerrardM.ChapmanG. B.McCaulK. D.WeinsteinN. D. (2007) Meta-analysis of the relationship between risk perception and health behavior: The example of vaccination. Health Psychology26: 136–145.
5.
BujarskiS. J.KlaneckyA. K.McChargueD. E. (2010) The relationship between alexithymia and alcohol-related risk perceptions: The moderating effect of general trauma in a college population. Addictive Behaviors35: 363–366. doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2009.10.023.
6.
CampoS.CameronK. A. (2006) Differential effects of exposure to social norms campaigns: A cause for concern. Health Communication19: 209–219. doi:10.1207/s15327027hc1903_3.
7.
ChaikenS. (1980) Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology39: 752–766.
8.
ChenY.FeeleyT. H. (2014) Numeracy, information-seeking and self-efficacy in managing health: An analysis using the 2007 Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS). Health Communication29: 843–853. doi:10.1080/10410236.2013.807904.
9.
DeJongW. (2002) The role of mass media campaigns in reducing high-risk drinking among college students. Journal of Studies on Alcohol(Suppl 14): 182–192.
10.
De WitJ. B. F.DasE.VetR. (2008) What works best: Objective statistics or a personal testimonial? An assessment of the persuasive effects of different types of message evidence on risk perception. Health Psychology27: 110–115. doi:10.1037/0278-6133.27.1.110.
11.
FagerlinA.Zikmund-FisherB. J.UbelP. A.JankovicA.DerryH. A.SmithD. M. (2007) Measuring numeracy without a math test: Development of the Subjective Numeracy Scale (SNS). Medical Decision Making27: 672–680.
12.
FloydD. L.Prentice-DunnS.RogersR. W. (2000) A meta-analysis of research on protection motivation theory. Journal of Applied Social Psychology30: 407–429. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2000.tb02323.x.
13.
GalesicM.Garcia-RetameroR. (2011) Graph literacy: A cross-cultural comparison. Medical Decision Making31: 444–457. doi:10.1177/0272989x10373805.
14.
Garcia-RetameroR.GalesicM. (2010) Who profits from visual aids: Overcoming challenges in people’s understanding of risks. Social Science & Medicine70: 1019–1025. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.11.031.
15.
HessR.VisschersV. H. M.SiegristM.KellerC. (2011) How do people perceive graphical risk communication? The role of subjective numeracy. Journal of Risk Research14: 47–61. doi:10.1080/13669877.2010.488745.
16.
HuchtingK.LacA.LaBrieJ. (2008) An application of the theory of planned behavior to sorority alcohol consumption. Addictive Behaviors33: 538–551.
17.
Johnston, L. D., O'Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., & Schulenberg, J. E. (2011). Monitoring the future national survey results on drug use, 1975--2010: Volume II, college students and adults ages (pp. 19--50). Ann Arbor: Institute for Social Research, The University of Michigan. Retrieved from http://monitoringthefuture.org/pubs/monographs/mtf-vol2_2010.pdf.
18.
KarlssonP. (2008) Explaining small effects of information-based drug prevention: The importance of considering preintervention levels in risk perceptions. Journal of Alcohol and Drug Education52: 9–17.
19.
KellerC.SiegristM.VisschersV. (2009) Effect of risk ladder format on risk perception in high- and low-numerate individuals. Risk Analysis29: 1255–1264. doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.2009.01261.x.
20.
KleinW.GeaghanT.MacDonaldT. (2007) Unplanned sexual activity as a consequence of alcohol use: A prospective study of risk perceptions and alcohol use among college freshmen. Journal of American College Health56: 317–323.
21.
LipkusI. M.SamsaG.RimerB. K. (2001) General performance on a numeracy scale among highly educated samples. Medical Decision Making21: 37–44.
22.
McCarthyD. M.PedersenS. L.LeutyM. E. (2005) Negative consequences and cognitions about drinking and driving. Journal of Studies on Alcohol66: 567–570.
23.
McMathB. F.Prentice-DunnS. (2005) Protection motivation theory and skin cancer risk: The role of individual differences in responses to persuasive appeals. Journal of Applied Social Psychology35: 621–643. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2005.tb02138.x.
24.
Miron-ShatzT.HanochY.GraefD.SagiM. (2009) Presentation format affects comprehension and risk assessment: The case of prenatal screening. Journal of Health Communication14: 439–450. doi:10.1080/10810730903032986.
25.
National Cancer Institute. (2007). Promoting healthy lifestyles: Policy, program, and personal recommendations for reducing cancer risk. 2006–2007 Annual report. President’s cancer panel. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute.
O’NeillS. C.McBrideC. M.AlfordS. H.KaphingstK. A. (2010) Preferences for genetic and behavioral health information: The impact of risk factors and disease attributions. Annals of Behavioral Medicine40: 127–137. doi:10.1007/s12160-010-9197-1.
28.
PetersE.DieckmannN. F.DixonA.HibbardJ. H.MertzC. K.SlovicP. (2007) Less is more in presenting quality information to consumers. Medical Care Research and Review64: 169–190.
29.
ReynaV. F.NelsonW. L.HanP. K.DieckmannN. F. (2009) How numeracy influences risk comprehension and medical decision making. Psychological Bulletin135: 943–973. doi:10.1037/a0017327.
30.
RichlandL. E.StiglerJ. W.HolyoakK. J. (2012) Teaching the conceptual structure of mathematics. Educational Psychologist47: 189–203. doi:10.1080/00461520.2012.667065.
31.
SchützeM.BoeingH.PischonT.RehmJ.KehoeT.GmelG.BergmannM. M. (2011) Alcohol attributable burden of incidence of cancer in eight European countries based on results from prospective cohort study. BMJ342: d1584.
32.
SevertsonD. J.HenriquesJ. B. (2009) The effect of graphics on environmental health risk beliefs, emotions, behavioral intentions and recall. Risk Analysis29: 1549–1565. doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.2009.01299.x.
33.
SheeranP.HarrisP.EptonT. (2014) Does heightening risk appraisals change people’s intentions and behavior? A meta-analysis of experimental studies. Psychological Bulletin140: 511–543.
34.
SmerecnikC. M. R.MestersI.KesselsL. T. E.RuiterR. A. C.de VriesN. K.de VriesH. (2010) Understanding the positive effects of graphical risk information on comprehension: Measuring attention directed to written, tabular, and graphical risk information. Risk Analysis30: 1387–1398. doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01435.x.
35.
StranoD. A.CuomoM. J.VenableR. H. (2004) Predictors of undergraduate student binge drinking. Journal of College Counseling7: 50–63. doi:10.1002/j.2161-1882.2004.tb00259.x.
36.
TaitA. R.Voepel-LewisT.Zikmund-FisherB. J.FagerlinA. (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 Communication15: 487–501. doi:10.1080/10810730.2010.492560.
37.
TaniusB. E.WoodS.HanochY.RiceT. (2009) Aging and choice: Applications to Medicare part D. Judgment and Decision Making4: 92–101.
38.
U.S. Department of Education. (2009). Students who study science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) in postsecondary education. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2009/2009161.pdf.
39.
WatersE. A.SullivanH. W.NelsonW.HesseB. W. (2009) What is my cancer risk? How internet-based cancer risk assessment tools communicate individualized risk estimates to the public: Content analysis. Journal of Medical Internet Research11: 1–14. doi:10.2196/jmir.1222.
40.
WechslerH.LeeJ. E.KuoM.SeibringM.NelsonT. F.LeeH. (2002) Trends in college binge drinking during a period of increased prevention efforts: Finding from four Harvard School of Public Health College Alcohol Study surveys 1993. 2001. Journal of American College Health50: 203–217.
41.
WeinsteinN. D. (2000) Perceived probability, perceived severity, and health-protective behavior. Health Psychology19(1): 65–74. doi:10.1037/0278-6133.19.1.65.
42.
WrightA. J.WhitwellS. C. L.TakeichiC.HankinsM.MarteauT. M. (2009) The impact of numeracy on reactions to different graphic risk presentation formats: An experimental analogue study. British Journal of Health Psychology14: 107–125. doi:10.1348/135910708x304432.
43.
YangZ. J.McComasK. A.GayG.LeonardJ. P.DannenbergA. J.DillonH. (2010) Applying the theory of planned behavior to study health decisions related to potential risks. Journal of Risk Research13: 1007–1026.
44.
Zikmund-FisherB. J.SmithD. M.UbelP. A.FagerlinA. (2007) Validation of the subjective numeracy scale (SNS): Effects of low numeracy on comprehension of risk communications and utility elicitations. Medical Decision Making27: 663–671.
