Using eye tracking and gaze pattern analysis to test a "dirty bomb" decision aid in a pilot RCT in urban adults with limited literacy.
Using eye tracking and gaze pattern analysis to test a "dirty bomb" decision aid in a pilot RCT in urban adults with limited literacy.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/s12911-016-0304-5
复制
发表时间：
2016-06-08
影响因子：
3.5
通讯作者：
Parvanta C
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Bass SB;Gordon TF;Gordon R;Parvanta C
眼动追踪通常用于市场营销，以了解对材料的复杂反应，但尚未用于了解低文化水平的成年人如何获取健康信息或其与决策的关系。这项研究评估了参与者如何使用识字适当的“脏弹”决策辅助工具。参与者被随机分配到在电脑屏幕上显示的疾病预防控制中心“情况说明书”（n = 21）或识字适当的援助（n = 29）。使用7张内容相似的幻灯片，比较凝视模式、平均瞳孔注视时间和阅读和观看幻灯片的平均总时间。各组的文化水平以及对“知识自信”和预期行为的影响也进行了比较。结果显示，阅读密集书面材料的能力不同。与凝视模式显示未读文本或重复尝试阅读相同文本的对照组参与者相比，干预参与者更精确地遵循了7张内容相似的幻灯片中的4张文本，这表明他们难以理解关键的准备信息。对照组在7张幻灯片中有5张的瞳孔注视时间明显更长，每张幻灯片的总时间也更长。在那些识字率很低的人中，干预参与者比对照组更有可能说他们知道什么是“脏弹”，以及如果发生脏弹该如何应对。结果表明，受教育程度有限的成年人，特别是那些受教育程度很低的成年人，可能无法了解如何利用现有材料应对“脏弹”，使他们容易受到负面健康事件的影响。这项研究提供了个人如何感知和处理风险沟通信息的见解，说明了对有限识字人口的书面材料的定性经验的丰富而细致的理解。它还证明了在更大范围内使用这些方法以编制更有效的健康和风险宣传信息的可行性，这些信息旨在增进对一般健康准则的了解和遵守，并加强决策。这适用于有学习障碍的人、媒体读写能力有限的人以及需要使用现有各种辅助技术的人。因此，眼动追踪是一种实用的方法来理解这些不同的需求，以确保发展有说服力和突出的沟通。本文的在线版本（doi:10.1186/s12911-016- 0305 -5）包含补充材料，授权用户可以使用。
Eye tracking is commonly used in marketing to understand complex responses to materials, but has not been used to understand how low-literacy adults access health information or its relationship to decision making. This study assessed how participants use a literacy appropriate “dirty bomb” decision aid. Participants were randomized to receive a CDC “factsheet” (n = 21) or literacy-appropriate aid (n = 29) shown on a computer screen. Using 7 content similar slides, gaze patterns, mean pupil fixation time and mean overall time reading and looking at slides were compared. Groups were also compared by literacy level and effect on 'confidence of knowledge' and intended behavior. Results revealed differing abilities to read densely written material. Intervention participants more precisely followed text on 4 of 7 content-similar slides compared to control participants whose gaze patterns indicated unread text, or repeated attempts at reading the same text, suggesting difficulty in understanding key preparedness messages. Controls had significantly longer pupil fixations on 5 of 7 slides and spent more overall time on every slide. In those with very low literacy, intervention participants were more likely than controls to say they understood what a “dirty bomb” is and how to respond if one should occur. Results indicate limited- literacy adults, especially those with very low literacy, may not be able to understand how to respond during a “dirty bomb” using available materials, making them vulnerable to negative health events. This study provides insights into how individuals perceive and process risk communication messages, illustrating a rich and nuanced understanding of the qualitative experience of a limited literacy population with written materials. It also demonstrates the feasibility of using these methods on a wider scale to develop more effective health and risk communication messages designed to increase knowledge of and compliance with general health guidelines, and enhance decision making. This has application for those with learning disabilities, those with limited media-literacy skills, and those needing to access the diverse array of assistive technologies now available. Eye tracking is thus a practical approach to understanding these diverse needs to ensure the development of cogent and salient communication. The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12911-016-0304-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.