Improving Comprehension of Consent Forms in Online Research: An Empirical Test of Four Interventions.

IF 1.7 4区哲学 Q2 ETHICS

Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics Pub Date : 2025-02-01 Epub Date: 2025-03-14 DOI:10.1177/15562646251321132

Naomi K Grant, Leah K Hamilton, Jenalyn M Ormita

{"title":"Improving Comprehension of Consent Forms in Online Research: An Empirical Test of Four Interventions.","authors":"Naomi K Grant, Leah K Hamilton, Jenalyn M Ormita","doi":"10.1177/15562646251321132","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Informed consent is a guiding ethical principle when conducting research involving human participants. Yet, consent forms are often skimmed or ignored, jeopardizing informed consent. In two experiments, we test four interventions designed to encourage participants to read online consent forms more carefully. Experiment 1 employed a 2 (length: short or long) by 2 (timing: fixed or free) by 2 (quiz: present or absent) between-participants design. We measured instruction-following and comprehension of the consent form. Results showed that fixed timing and a quiz led to greater instruction-following, but consent form length had no effect. Experiment 2 employed a 2 (length: short or long) by 3 (delivery format: live, audiovisual, standard written) between-participants design. Once again, length had no effect, but both live and audiovisual formats increased instruction-following and comprehension. We recommend that researchers consider using fixed timing, adding a quiz, and/or using alternative delivery formats to help participants make an informed decision.</p>","PeriodicalId":50211,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics","volume":" ","pages":"46-54"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12048739/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15562646251321132","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Informed consent is a guiding ethical principle when conducting research involving human participants. Yet, consent forms are often skimmed or ignored, jeopardizing informed consent. In two experiments, we test four interventions designed to encourage participants to read online consent forms more carefully. Experiment 1 employed a 2 (length: short or long) by 2 (timing: fixed or free) by 2 (quiz: present or absent) between-participants design. We measured instruction-following and comprehension of the consent form. Results showed that fixed timing and a quiz led to greater instruction-following, but consent form length had no effect. Experiment 2 employed a 2 (length: short or long) by 3 (delivery format: live, audiovisual, standard written) between-participants design. Once again, length had no effect, but both live and audiovisual formats increased instruction-following and comprehension. We recommend that researchers consider using fixed timing, adding a quiz, and/or using alternative delivery formats to help participants make an informed decision.

查看原文本刊更多论文

提高在线研究中对同意书的理解：对四种干预措施的实证检验。

在进行涉及人类参与者的研究时，知情同意是一项指导道德原则。然而，知情同意书往往被略读或忽视，危及知情同意。在两个实验中，我们测试了四种干预措施，旨在鼓励参与者更仔细地阅读在线同意书。实验1采用2（长度：短或长）× 2（时间：固定或自由）× 2（测验：出席或缺席）的被试设计。我们测量了他们对同意书的理解程度。结果表明，固定的时间和测验能让学生更好地遵循指示，但同意书的长度没有影响。实验2采用2（长度：短或长）× 3（传递形式：现场、视听、标准书面）的参与者间设计。再一次，长度没有影响，但现场和视听形式都增加了指令遵循和理解。我们建议研究人员考虑使用固定的时间，增加测验，和/或使用替代的交付格式来帮助参与者做出明智的决定。

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

Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics 医学-医学：伦理

CiteScore

3.50

自引率

7.70%

发文量

审稿时长

>12 weeks

期刊介绍： The Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics (JERHRE) is the only journal in the field of human research ethics dedicated exclusively to empirical research. Empirical knowledge translates ethical principles into procedures appropriate to specific cultures, contexts, and research topics. The journal''s distinguished editorial and advisory board brings a range of expertise and international perspective to provide high-quality double-blind peer-reviewed original articles.