A Practical Significance Bias in Laypeople's Evaluation of Scientific Findings.

IF 4.8 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Psychological Science Pub Date : 2024-04-01 Epub Date: 2024-03-04 DOI:10.1177/09567976241231506
Audrey L Michal, Priti Shah
{"title":"A Practical Significance Bias in Laypeople's Evaluation of Scientific Findings.","authors":"Audrey L Michal, Priti Shah","doi":"10.1177/09567976241231506","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>People often rely on scientific findings to help them make decisions-however, failing to report effect magnitudes might lead to a potential bias in assuming findings are practically significant. Across two online studies (Prolific; <i>N</i> = 800), we measured U.S. adults' endorsements of expensive interventions described in media reports that led to effects that were small, large, or of unreported magnitude between groups. Participants who viewed interventions with unreported effect magnitudes were more likely to endorse interventions compared with those who viewed interventions with small effects and were just as likely to endorse interventions as those who viewed interventions with large effects, suggesting a practical significance bias. When effect magnitudes were reported, participants on average adjusted their evaluations accordingly. However, some individuals, such as those with low numeracy skills, were more likely than others to act on small effects, even when explicitly prompted to first consider the meaningfulness of the effect.</p>","PeriodicalId":20745,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Science","volume":" ","pages":"315-327"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological Science","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09567976241231506","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

People often rely on scientific findings to help them make decisions-however, failing to report effect magnitudes might lead to a potential bias in assuming findings are practically significant. Across two online studies (Prolific; N = 800), we measured U.S. adults' endorsements of expensive interventions described in media reports that led to effects that were small, large, or of unreported magnitude between groups. Participants who viewed interventions with unreported effect magnitudes were more likely to endorse interventions compared with those who viewed interventions with small effects and were just as likely to endorse interventions as those who viewed interventions with large effects, suggesting a practical significance bias. When effect magnitudes were reported, participants on average adjusted their evaluations accordingly. However, some individuals, such as those with low numeracy skills, were more likely than others to act on small effects, even when explicitly prompted to first consider the meaningfulness of the effect.

外行人评估科学发现时的实用意义偏差。
人们通常依赖科学研究结果来帮助自己做出决策--然而,如果不报告效果大小,就可能导致人们在假设研究结果具有实际意义时出现偏差。在两项在线研究(Prolific;N = 800)中,我们测量了美国成年人对媒体报道中描述的昂贵干预措施的认可度,这些干预措施在不同群体间产生的效果有大有小,或效果大小未报告。与效果较小的干预措施的参与者相比,观看未报告效果大小的干预措施的参与者更倾向于支持干预措施,而与观看效果较大的干预措施的参与者一样倾向于支持干预措施,这表明存在实际意义偏差。当报告效果大小时,参与者平均会相应地调整他们的评价。然而,有些人,如计算能力较低的人,比其他人更有可能根据较小的效果采取行动,即使在明确提示他们首先考虑效果的意义时也是如此。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Psychological Science
Psychological Science PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
13.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
156
期刊介绍: Psychological Science, the flagship journal of The Association for Psychological Science (previously the American Psychological Society), is a leading publication in the field with a citation ranking/impact factor among the top ten worldwide. It publishes authoritative articles covering various domains of psychological science, including brain and behavior, clinical science, cognition, learning and memory, social psychology, and developmental psychology. In addition to full-length articles, the journal features summaries of new research developments and discussions on psychological issues in government and public affairs. "Psychological Science" is published twelve times annually.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信