图书情报工作

图书情报工作 >

2020 , Vol. 64 >Issue 19: 61 - 70

DOI: https://doi.org/10.13266/j.issn.0252-3116.2020.19.007

情报研究

证据类型对在线健康信息标题选择的影响:眼动实验与启示

  • 姜婷婷 ,
  • 郭倩 ,
  • 徐亚苹 ,
  • 宋恩梅
展开
  • 1. 武汉大学信息管理学院 武汉 430072;
    2. 武汉大学信息资源研究中心 武汉 430072;
    3. 上海外国语大学图书馆 上海 200083
姜婷婷(ORCID:0000-0002-5310-2073),教授,博士;郭倩(ORCID:0000-0002-9216-5798),博士研究生;徐亚苹(ORCID:0000-0003-4800-9621),助理馆员,硕士。

收稿日期: 2020-03-11

  修回日期: 2020-06-11

  网络出版日期: 2020-10-05

基金资助

本文系国家自然科学基金项目"在线信息偶遇过程中趋避行为的产生规律与神经机制研究"（项目编号：71774125）和武汉大学自主科研项目（人文社会科学）"社交媒体新闻偶遇过程可视化与新闻趋避机制研究"研究成果之一。

收起

Evidence Type Influence on the Selection of Online Health Information Titles: Eye-Tracking Experiment and Implications

  • Jiang Tingting ,
  • Guo Qian ,
  • Xu Yaping ,
  • Song Enmei
Expand
  • 1 School of Information Management, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072;
    2 Center for Studies of Information Resources, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072;
    3 Library, Shanghai International Studies University, Shanghai 200083

Received date: 2020-03-11

  Revised date: 2020-06-11

  Online published: 2020-10-05

Fold

摘要

[目的/意义] 海量的互联网健康信息正在争夺用户的注意力，为其创建具有吸引力的标题变得尤为重要，越来越多的健康信息标题开始采用故事型或数据型的证据以达到这一目的。为此，需要探究不同的标题证据类型对用户选择在线健康信息具有怎样的影响。[方法/过程] 采取实验法探索在线健康信息标题的证据类型（故事型/数据型）、用户的内在状态、用户对标题的选择三者之间的关系，并考虑用户思维方式的调节作用。实验要求每位参与者在规定时限内完成对40条在线健康信息（包括标题和文章内容）的浏览任务，利用相关量表采集他们的内在情绪和认知状态，通过Tobbi眼动仪及其配套软件的录屏功能分别捕捉其眼动情况和点击行为。[结果/结论] 与故事型标题相比，参与者对数据型标题产生了更高的愉悦度和唤醒度，并且也更有可能激发点击行为；唤醒度在标题证据类型和点击行为之间存在中介作用；思维方式在标题证据类型和注视时长、注视次数之间都存在调节作用。本研究成果有助于信息行为领域对于信息内在特征如何影响信息选择的理解，为创建有效的在线健康信息标题提供有益的启示。

关键词： 在线健康信息; 信息标题; 证据类型; 故事型; 数据型; S-O-R模型

本文引用格式

姜婷婷 , 郭倩 , 徐亚苹 , 宋恩梅 . 证据类型对在线健康信息标题选择的影响:眼动实验与启示[J]. 图书情报工作, 2020 , 64(19) : 61 -70 . DOI: 10.13266/j.issn.0252-3116.2020.19.007

Abstract

[Purpose/significance] A huge amount of health information are competing for users' attention on the Internet, thus in urgent need of attractive headlines. More and more online health information titles are adopting anecdotal or numerical evidence to increase their attractiveness. [Method/process] This paper explored the relationship among the type of evidence in online health information titles, users' emotional and cognitive responses, and their attention to and selection of health titles, based on an experiment. Each participant was asked to complete a task of browsing 40 health information items (including both titles and articles) within a time limit. Users' emotional and cognitive responses to the titles were collected with related scales, and their attention and selection were captured with a Tobbi eye-tracker and its built-in screen recorder. [Result/conclusion] Numerical titles would arouse higher levels of pleasure and arousal as well as more likely to inspire clicking behavior. The level of arousal had mediating effects on the relationship between title evidence type and clicking behavior. Thinking style had moderating effects on the relationship between title evidence type and fixation duration and that between title evidence type and fixation count. The findings help our understanding of how the internal characteristics of information affects its selection, and provide useful implications for creating effective online headlines in the health domain.

Key words： online health information; information title; evidence type; anecdotal; numerical; S-O-R Model

参考文献

[1] ZEBREGS S, VAN d P B, NEIJENS P, et al. The differential impact of statistical and narrative evidence on beliefs, attitude, and intention:a meta-analysis[J]. Health communication, 2015, 30(3):282-289.
[2] BEKALU M A, BIGMAN C A, MCCLOUD R F, et al. The relative persuasiveness of narrative versus non-narrative health messages in public health emergency communication:evidence from a field experiment[J]. Preventive medicine, 2018(111):284-290.
[3] HORNIKX J. Combining anecdotal and statistical evidence in real-life discourse:comprehension and persuasiveness[J]. Discourse processes a multidisciplinary journal, 2018, 55(3):1-13.
[4] LIN T C, HWANG L L, LAI Y J. Effects of argument quality, source credibility and self-reported diabetes knowledge on message attitudes:an experiment using diabetes related messages[J]. Health information & libraries journal, 2017, 34(3):225-235.
[5] YI M Y, YOON J J, DAVIS J M, et al. Untangling the antecedents of initial trust in web-based health information:the roles of argument quality, source expertise, and user perceptions of information quality and risk[J]. Decision support systems, 2013, 55(1):284-295.
[6] KIM J, NAN X. Temporal framing effects differ for narrative versus non-narrative messages:the case of promoting HPV vaccination[J]. Communication Research, 2016, 46(3):1-17.
[7] VAN STEE S K, NOAR S M, HARRUBGTON N G, et al. The effects of metaphor use and message format on cognitive processing and persuasive outcomes of condom promotion messages[J]. Communication studies, 2018, 69(1):23-41.
[8] BORAH P, XIAO X. The importance of ‘likes’:the interplay of message framing, source, and social endorsement on credibility perceptions of health information on facebook[J]. Journal of health communication, 2018, 23(4):399-411.
[9] VAN'T RIET J, WERRIJ M Q, NIEUWKAMP R, et al. Message frame and self-efficacy influence the persuasiveness of nutrition information in a fast-food restaurant[J]. Food quality and preference, 2013, 29(1):1-5.
[10] KUIKEN J, SCHUTH A, SPITTERS M, et al. Effective headlines of newspaper articles in a digital environment[J]. Digital journalism, 2017, 5(10):1300-1314.
[11] BERGER C R. A tale of two communication modes:when rational and experiential processing systems encounter statistical and anecdotal depictions of threat[J]. Journal of language and social psychology, 2007, 26(3):215-233.
[12] TENENBOIM O, COHEN A A. What prompts users to click and comment:a longitudinal study of online news[J]. Journalism, 2015, 16(2):198-217.
[13] BLOM J N, HANSEN K R. Click bait:forward-reference as lure in online news headlines[J]. Journal of pragmatics, 2015, 76:87-100.
[14] DONSBACH W. Psychology of news decisions:factors behind journalists' professional behavior[J]. Journalism, 2004, 5(2):131-157.
[15] WENDELIN M, ENGELMANN I, NEUBARTH J. User rankings and journalistic news selection:comparing news values and topics[J]. Journalis studies, 2017, 18(2):135-153.
[16] KEIB K, ESPINA C, LEE Y-I, et al. Picture this:the influence of emotionally valenced images, on attention, selection, and sharing of social media news[J]. Media psychology, 2018, 21(2):202-221.
[17] RELLO L, BAEZA-YATES R. Good fonts for dyslexia[C]//Conference on computers and accessibilit. Washington, USA:ACM Press, 2013:1-8.
[18] SULFLOW M, SCHAFER S, WINTER S. Selective attention in the news feed:an eye-tracking study on the perception and selection of political news posts on facebook[J]. New media & society, 2019, 21(1):168-190.
[19] KIM H S, FORQUER H, RUSKO J, et al. Selective exposure to health information:the role of headline features in the choice of health newsletter Articles[J]. Media psychology, 2016, 19(4):614-637.
[20] KESSLER S H, ENGELMANN I. Why do we click? investigating reasons for user selection on a news aggregator website[J]. Communications, 2018, 44(2):225-247.
[21] ATKINSON G, DRIESENER C, CORKINDALE D. Search engine advertisement design effects on click-through rates[J]. Journal of interactive advertising, 2014, 14(1):24-30.
[22] SUBOTIC S, MUKHERJEE B. Short and amusing:the relationship between title characteristics, downloads, and citations in psychology articles[J]. Journal of information science, 2014, 40(1):115-124.
[23] GRAAF A d, SANDERS J, HOKEN H. Characteristics of narrative interventions and health effects:a review of the content, form, and context of narratives in health-related narrative persuasion research[J]. Review of communication research, 2016(4):88-131.
[24] BRAVERMAN J. Testimonials versus informational persuasive messages:the moderating effect of delivery mode and personal involvement[J]. Communication research, 2008, 35(5):666-694.
[25] WOJCIESZAK M, KIM N. How to improve attitudes toward disliked groups:the effects of narrative versus numerical evidence on political persuasion[J]. Communication research, 2016, 43(6):785-809.
[26] MCKINLEY C J, LIMBU Y, JAYACHANDRAN C. The influence of statistical versus exemplar appeals on indian adults' health intentions:an investigation of direct effects and intervening persuasion processes[J]. Health communication, 2017, 32(4):427-437.
[27] FALZON C, RADEL R, CANTOR A, et al. Understanding narrative effects in physical activity promotion:the influence of breast cancer survivor testimony on exercise beliefs, self-efficacy, and intention in breast cancer patients[J]. Supportive care in cancer, 2015, 23(3):761-768.
[28] KREUTER M W, HOLMES K, ALCARAZl K, et al. Comparing narrative and informational videos to increase mammography in low-income african american women[J]. Patient education and counseling, 2010(81):1-19.
[29] NAN X, DAHLSTROM M F, RICHARDS A, et al. Influence of evidence type and narrative type on HPV risk perception and intention to obtain the HPV vaccine[J]. Health communication, 2015, 30(3):301-308.
[30] De GRAAF A, VAN DEN PUTTE B, NGUYEN M-H, et al. The effectiveness of narrative versus informational smoking education on smoking beliefs, attitudes and intentions of low-educated adolescents[J]. Psychology & health, 2017, 32(7):810-825.
[31] JAIN P, HOFFMAN E, BEAM M, et al. Effect of message format and content on attitude accessibility regarding sexually transmitted infections[J]. Health communication, 2016, 32(11):1376-1384.
[32] HASTALL M R, KNOBLOCH-WESTERWICK S. Severity, efficacy, and evidence type as determinants of health message exposure[J]. Health communication, 2013, 28(4):378-388.
[33] KNOBLOCH-WESTERWICK S, SARGE M A. Impacts of exemplification and efficacy as characteristics of an online weight-loss message on selective exposure and subsequent weight-loss behavior[J]. Communication research, 2015, 42(4):547-568.
[34] SHEN F, SHEER V C, LI R. Impact of narratives on persuasion in health communication:a meta-analysis[J]. Journal of advertising, 2015, 44(2):105-113.
[35] GREENE K, BRINN L S. Messages influencing college women's tanning bed use:statistical versus narrative evidence format and a self-assessment to increase perceived susceptibility[J]. Journal of health communication, 2003, 8(5):443-461.
[36] ZHANG N, PANG J, WAN J. Self-disclosure in social network sites:an integration of stimulus-organism-response paradigm and privacy calculus model[C]//The seventeenth wuhan international conference on e-business-social network and commerce. Wuhan:AISeL, 2018:381-389.
[37] KIM A J, JOHNSON K K P. Power of consumers using social media:examining the influences of brand-related user-generated content on facebook[J]. Computers in human behavior, 2016(58):98-108.
[38] KAMBOJ S, SARMAH B, GUPTA S, et al. Examining branding co-creation in brand communities on social media:applying the paradigm of stimulus-organism-response[J]. International journal of information management, 2018(39):169-185.
[39] NISCO A D, WARNABY G. Urban design and tenant variety influences on consumers' emotions and approach behavior[J]. Journal of business research, 2014, 67(2):211-217.
[40] HUANG M, ALI R, LIAO J. The effect of user experience in online games on word of mouth:a pleasure-arousal-dominance (PAD) model perspective[J]. Computers in human behavior, 2017(75):329-338.
[41] ALSAGGAF M A, ALTHONAYAN A. An empirical investigation of customer intentions influenced by service quality using the mediation of emotional and cognitive responses[J]. Journal of enterprise information management, 2017, 31(4):194-223.
[42] EROGLU S A, MACHLEIT K A, DAVIS L M. Atmospheric qualities of online retailing:a conceptual model and implications[J]. Journal of business research, 2001, 54(2):177-184.
[43] EPSTEIN S, PACINI R, DENES-RAJ V, et al. Individual differences in intuitive-experiential and analytical-rational thinking styles[J]. Journal of personality & social psychology, 1996, 71(2):390-405.
[44] PACINI R, EPSTEIN S. The relation of rational and experiential information processing styles to personality, basic beliefs, and the ratio-bias phenomenon[J]. J pers soc psychol, 1999, 76(6):972-987.
[45] EPSTEIN S. Cognitive-experiential self-theory:an integrative theory of personality[J]. Handbook of psychology, second edition, 2012(5):93-118.
[46] RUSOU Z, ZAKAY D, USHER M. Pitting intuitive and analytical thinking against each other:the case of transitivity[J]. Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2013, 20(3):608-614.
[47] FENG B, LEE K J. The influence of thinking styles on responses to supportive messages[J]. Communication studies, 2010, 61(2):224-238.
[48] HINNANT A, SUBRAMANIAN R, YOUNG R. User comments on climate stories:impacts of anecdotal vs. scientific evidence[J]. Climatic change, 2016, 138(3/4):411-424.
[49] BRAVERMAN J. Testimonials versus informational persuasive messages:the moderating effect of delivery mode and personal involvement[J]. Communication research, 2008, 35(5):666-694.
[50] SCACCO J M, MUDDIMAN A. Investigating the influence of "clickbait" news headlines[EB/OL].[2020-02-20].https://engagingnewsproject.org/wpcontent/uploads/2016/08/ENP-Investigating-the-Influence-of-ClickbaitNews-Headlines.pdf.
[51] FALAHATI QADIMI FUMANI M R, GOLTAJI M, PARTO P. The impact of title length and punctuation marks on article citations[J]. Annals of library and information studies, 2015, 62(3):126-132.
[52] MA Y, CHEN J. Effects of platform and content attributes on information dissemination on we media:a case study on wechat platform[C]//Wuhan international conference on e-business. Wuhan:AISeL, 2017:48-58.
[53] ENGELMANN I, WENDELIN M. Comment counts or news factors or both? influences on news website users' news selectioners' news selection[J]. International journal of communication, 2017(11):2501-2519.
[54] 2019国民健康洞察报告[EB/OL].[2020-02-20]. https://www.useit.com.cn/thread-21958-1-1.html.
[55] SHILOH S, SALTON E, SHARABI D. Individual differences in rational and intuitive thinking styles as predictors of heuristic responses and framing effects[J]. Personality and individual differences, 2002, 32(3):415-429.
[56] MEHRABIAN A, RUSSELL J A. An approach to environmental psychology[M].Cambridg, MA:The MIT Press, 1974.
[57] CHANG H H, CHEN S W. The impact of online store environment cues on purchase intention[J]. Online information review, 2008, 32(6):818-841.
[58] ISLAM J U, RAHMAN Z. The impact of online brand community characteristics on customer engagement:an application of stimulus-organism-response paradigm[J]. Telematics & informatics, 2017, 34(4):96-109.
[59] 黄燕, 范哲. 移动阅读APP可用性测量量表构建[J]. 图书馆论坛, 2018, 38(2):119-125.
[60] BARON R M, KENNY D A. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research:conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations[J]. Journal of personality and social psychology, 1986, 51(6):1173-1182.
[61] IACOBUCCI D. Mediation analysis and categorical variables:the final frontier[J]. Journal of consumer psychology, 2012, 22(4):582-594.
[62] HSIEH Y C, CHIU H C, TANG Y C, et al. Understanding the influences of story elements in service businesses[J]. Service business, 2018, 12(2):601-619.
[63] DILLARD A J, HISLER G. Enhancing the effects of a narrative message through experiential information processing:an experimental study[J]. Psychology & health, 2015, 30(7):803-820.
Options
文章导航

/

〈 〉