Salience Versus Proportional Reasoning: Rethinking the Mechanism Behind Graphical Display Effects

Two experiments examined predictions from two separate explanations for previously observed display effects for communicating low‐probability risks: foreground:background salience and proportional reasoning. According to foreground:background salience, people's risk perceptions are based on the relative salience of the foreground (number of people harmed) versus the background (number of people at risk), such that calling attention to the background makes the risk seem smaller. Conversely, the proportional reasoning explanation states that what matters is whether the respondent attends to the proportion, which conveys how small the risk is. In Experiment 1, we made the background more salient via color and bolding; in contrast to the foreground:background salience prediction, this manipulation did not influence participants' risk aversion. In Experiment 2, we separately manipulated whether the foreground and the background were displayed graphically or numerically. In keeping with the proportional reasoning hypothesis, there was an interaction whereby participants given formats that displayed the foreground and background in the same modality (graphs or numbers, thereby making the proportion easier to form) saw the probability as smaller and were less risk averse than participants given the information in different modalities. There was also a main effect of displaying the background graphically, providing some support for foreground:background salience. In total, this work suggests that the proportional reasoning account provides a good explanation of many display effects related to communicating low‐probability risks, although there is some role for foreground:background salience as well. Copyright © 2018 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Comparing What to What,on What Scale? The Impact of Item Comparisons and Reference Points in Communicating Risk and Uncertainty

The mandated public availability of individual hospital's audit data for children's heart surgery in the UK creates a challenging scenario for communicating these complex and sensitive data to diverse audiences. On the basis of this scenario, we conducted three experiments with the aim of understanding how best to help lay people understand these data and the practical goal of improving the public presentation of these data. The experiments compared different outcome measures for displaying the survival rate (percentage scale versus the ratio of the predicted/observed rates) and presentation formats (individual hospital versus all hospitals shown) for outcomes data presented relative to prediction intervals generated by a risk model that adjusts for case mix. Our data highlight how easily inappropriate comparisons can influence evaluations of complex data: for instance, both a survival ratio of 1 and the presence of other hospitals seemingly provided reference points that resulted in inappropriately harsh evaluations of some hospitals. By drawing on evaluability theory, we demonstrate how to enhance people's understanding of these complex data while also discouraging inappropriate comparisons, which has implications for communicating risk and uncertainty and for choice architecture design in a range of contexts. Copyright © 2018 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Stereotype Threat Effects on Learning From a Cognitively Demanding Mathematics Lesson

Stereotype threat—a situational context in which individuals are concerned about confirming a negative stereotype—is often shown to impact test performance, with one hypothesized mechanism being that cognitive resources are temporarily co‐opted by intrusive thoughts and worries, leading individuals to underperform despite high content knowledge and ability (see Schmader & Beilock, 2012 ). We test here whether stereotype threat may also impact initial student learning and knowledge formation when experienced prior to instruction. Predominantly African American fifth‐grade students provided either their race or the date before a videotaped, conceptually demanding mathematics lesson. Students who gave their race retained less learning over time, enjoyed the lesson less, reported a diminished desire to learn more, and were less likely to choose to engage in an optional math activity. The detrimental impact was greatest among students with high baseline cognitive resources. While stereotype threat has been well documented to harm test performance, the finding that effects extend to initial learning suggests that stereotype threat's contribution to achievement gaps may be greatly underestimated.     

The Role of Hope in Preventive Interventions

Preventive interventions have historically focused on reducing risk factors for psychological difficulties. Recent research has found that prevention programs are more effective when they enhance strengths, rather than merely reduce risk factors. An increased focus on strengths is consistent with a positive psychology perspective. In fact, hope has been found to be a central human strength in the positive psychology literature. Hope is associated with better adjustment, lower anxiety, lower depression, greater academic performance, and greater athletic achievement. In addition, individuals with high hope are able to respond more adaptively after traumatic events and physical illnesses. Intervention studies have shown that hope can be increased in individuals, and hope has been shown to predict more positive outcomes in psychotherapy. Future directions for research are outlined, including investigating hope as a preventive intervention for members of stigmatized groups, including ethnic minorities and lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals.     

Effectiveness of a Universal,Interdependent Group Contingency Program on Children's Academic Achievement: A Countywide Evaluation

The Good Behavior Game (GBG) is a universal prevention program designed to increase academic engagement and to decrease disruptive behavior in elementary school-age children. Teachers and other school personnel use interdependent group contingencies to improve students’ behavior in the classroom. Previous research indicates the GBG is efficacious in reducing behavior problems; however, little research has examined its effects on academic achievement in real-world settings. In this study, the authors evaluated the PAX GBG, a commercially available version of the GBG, as it is typically administered in elementary schools. The authors examined standardized reading and mathematics scores across one academic year for 949 students enrolled in the GBG or comparison classrooms. Results showed significant but small effects of the GBG on reading and mathematics. Results were greatest for boys, children with lower achievement scores at baseline, and students from more economically disadvantaged school districts. School personnel may find the PAX GBG useful in improving children's behavior and academic skills.     

Sexual Orientation and Substance Use: The Moderation of Parental Attachment

There is a substantial amount of research exploring patterns of sexual orientation and substance use, often finding increased substance use for non-heterosexuals. An additional body of research explores the concept of family support from a number of perspectives. There is a noted lack of overlay between family support, sexual orientation, and substance use. This research uses data from Waves III and IV of the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health to examine how parental attachment, as a measure of family support, may moderate the association between sexual orientation and substance use. We test the notion that as parental attachment increases, substance use patterns will decrease for both heterosexual and non-heterosexual individuals. We also hypothesize that parental attachment will have a stronger effect of decreasing substance use for non-heterosexuals than for heterosexuals.