No abstract

Participants often do not read consent forms in social science research. This is not surprising, especially for online studies, given they do not typically offer greater risk than what is encountered in daily life. However, if no one is reading, are participants really informed? This study used previous research to craft experimentally manipulated consent forms utilizing different visual presentations (e.g., greater use of line spacing, bullets, bolding, diagrams). Participants ( n = 547) were randomly exposed to one of seven form variations. Results found no significant differences between forms in reading or comprehension. Open-ended questions asked participants why they do not read consent forms and what would influence them to read the forms. Participants most frequently stated forms need to be shorter, and important information needs to be highlighted. We suggest improvements to informed consent forms, including removing much of the information that is constant across forms, and only including unique aspects of studies.

No abstract

As informed consent documents have historically gotten lengthier, recent revisions to federal Common Rule guidelines now require consent forms that are “concise” and presented in ways that “facilitate comprehension.” The current research sought to apply these guidelines by developing a consent process for an online study that was only 71 words and also allowed participants a choice to either continue directly to the study or learn more about the study to which they were consenting. All participants (100%, N = 429) decided to continue directly to the study, choosing to forgo additional information about the study and the institutional review board (IRB) approval process. Participants indicated they liked this streamlined consent process, even though on average they only comprehended about half of the information this streamlined process contained. A plurality of participants indicated they would like to see this style of streamlined consent continued in future online studies. However, if we want to continue referring to informed consent as informed, future research should be welcomed and supported by IRBs to seek ways to apply the newest Common Rule guidelines while increasing comprehension; otherwise, informed consent will likely always remain an oxymoron.

Purpose A planet that can no longer sustain life is a frightening thought – and one that is often present in mass media messages. Therefore, this study aims to test the components of a classic fear appeal theory, the extended parallel process model (EPPM) and to determine how well its constructs predict sustainability behavioral intentions. This study also strove to uncover students’ motivations and attitudes that are not present in the EPPM. Design/methodology/approach An online survey of 779 college students was conducted. Findings Results reveal that both threat and efficacy are significant predictors of behavioral intention, consistent with the EPPM. However, an analysis of open-ended comments reveals that subjective normative influence and incentives also play a key role in students performing future sustainable behaviors. Practical implications These findings provide a framework to educators and message designers of sustainability groups on college campuses highlighting the importance of including multiple constructs in their messages to students. Threatening messages will not be enough to increase behavioral intentions. Fear inducing messages must be combined with messages to increase self- and response efficacy. Education is also not the only piece of the puzzle. Students state difficulty in performing some sustainable behaviors as a key barrier, indicating a need to incorporate infrastructure changes at campuses to facilitate greater ease among students to act sustainably. Originality value This study tests the EPPM’s utility in helping to find the most effective ways to influence college students’ future behavioral intentions toward acting sustainably.