Metaphor in Formative Evaluation and Message Design: An Application to Relationships and Alcohol Use

Sopory, Pradeep

doi:10.1207/s15327027hc1702_3

Cited by 27 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Metaphorical language 1 is commonly used to communicate about health in contexts ranging from understanding how people make sense of illness, improving providerpatient communication, and enhancing the effectiveness of health education messages (Bowker, 1996;Gibbs & Franks, 2002;Hutchings, 1998;Morgan, 1997;Sopory, 2005). There are at least two features of metaphors that make them so attractive in the health communication context.…”

Section: Using Metaphors In the Clinical Trials Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Metaphor Use and Health Literacy: A Pilot Study of Strategies to Explain Randomization in Cancer Clinical Trials

Krieger

Parrott

Nussbaum

2010

Journal of Health Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Patients often have difficulty understanding what randomization is and why it is needed in Phase III clinical trials. Physicians commonly report using metaphorical language to convey the role of chance in being assignment to treatment; however, the effectiveness of this strategy as an educational tool has not been explored. Guided by W. McGuire's (1972) information-processing model, the purpose of this pilot study was to explore effects of metaphors to explain randomization on message acceptance and behavioral intention to participate in a Phase III clinical trial among a sample of low-income, rural women (N = 64). Participants were randomly assigned to watch a video that explained randomization using 1 of 3 message strategies: a low-literacy definition, standard metaphor (i.e., flip of a coin), or a culturally derived metaphor (i.e., sex of a baby). The influence of attention on behavioral intentions to participate in clinical trials was partially moderated by message strategy. Under conditions of low attention, participants in the culturally derived metaphor condition experienced significantly higher intentions to participate in clinical trials compared with participants in the standard metaphor condition. However, as attention increased, differences in intentions among the conditions diminished. Having a positive affective response to the randomization message was a strong, positive predictor of behavioral intentions to participate in clinical trials. The authors discuss the theoretical and practical implications of these findings.

show abstract

Section: Using Metaphors In the Clinical Trials Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Metaphor Use and Health Literacy: A Pilot Study of Strategies to Explain Randomization in Cancer Clinical Trials

Krieger

Parrott

Nussbaum

2010

Journal of Health Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For health care providers, it constitutes a strategy for educating patients and their families about a disease or potential treatment options (Arroliga, Newman, Longworth, & Stoller, 2002;Sontag, 1989). For health message designers, it may enhance the persuasiveness of a message (Freimuth, Linnan, & Potter, 2000;Morgan, 1997;Sopory, 2005). Despite the pervasiveness of figurative language in health communication, the implications of metaphorical language on the health literacy of particular audiences are seldom evaluated.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Last Resort or Roll of the Die? Exploring the Role of Metaphors in Cancer Clinical Trials Education Among Medically Underserved Populations

Krieger

2013

Journal of Health Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Improving communication about cancer clinical trials may help increase patients' understanding of medical research and their interest in participating. It is unfortunate that there is little empirical research to provide guidance on how to adapt clinical trial messages to maximize cultural sensitivity. This study examines (a) how medically underserved women conceptualize clinical trials by examining the language they use to describe them and (b) how this audience interprets metaphorical language used to explain randomization in the context of Phase III cancer clinical trials. The author conducted in-depth interviews and focus groups with 41 rural, low-income older women who either had been diagnosed with cancer or were caregivers for a person with cancer. The most commonly used lay metaphors for clinical trials had strong negative connotations and included treatment by trial and error, patients are guinea pigs, and treatment of last resort. Participants also expressed strong, unfavorable responses to conventional metaphors that equate randomization with the roll of a die or use other gambling language. Low-literacy definition approaches were unexpectedly problematic, suggesting the potential effectiveness of culturally grounded metaphors for communicating about clinical trials. Ethical implications of these findings for cancer communication are discussed.

show abstract

“…These icons relied on metaphorical interpretations to communicate the health effect, metaphors that individuals continuously rely upon to understand complex phenomenon, such as health or disease (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980; Palmer-Wackerly & Krieger, 2015). Thus, it may be that individuals were easily able to connect the symbolic icons to their own lay theories of health to interpret the intended meaning (Sopory, 2005). …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Icons for health effects of cigarette smoke: a test of semiotic type

Lazard

Schmidt

et al. 2017

J Behav Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose We sought to identify icons to effectively communicate health harms of chemicals in cigarette smoke. Methods Participants were a convenience sample of 701 U.S. adults. A within-subjects online experiment explored the effects of icon semiotic type: symbolic (arbitrary, most abstract), indexical, and iconic (representative, most concrete). Outcomes were perceived representation, affect toward smoking, elaboration, perceived severity, and perceived effectiveness. Results For not-easy-to-visualize harms of cancer and addiction, symbolic icons received the highest ratings (all p<.001). For easy-to-visualize symptoms of heart attack/stroke, indexical icons received the highest ratings (all p<.001). For easy-to-visualize harm of reproductive organ damage, the iconic image did best (all p<.001). Icon type often had a larger impact among participants with higher health literacy. Conclusions Symbolic icons may be most effective for health effects not easily visualized. Iconic or indexical icons may be more effective for health effects attributable to specific body parts or symptoms.

show abstract

Metaphor in Formative Evaluation and Message Design: An Application to Relationships and Alcohol Use

Cited by 27 publications

References 25 publications

Metaphor Use and Health Literacy: A Pilot Study of Strategies to Explain Randomization in Cancer Clinical Trials

Metaphor Use and Health Literacy: A Pilot Study of Strategies to Explain Randomization in Cancer Clinical Trials

Last Resort or Roll of the Die? Exploring the Role of Metaphors in Cancer Clinical Trials Education Among Medically Underserved Populations

Icons for health effects of cigarette smoke: a test of semiotic type

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About