Impact of selective evidence presentation on judgments of health inequality trends: an experimental study.

Reducing health inequalities is a key objective for many governments and public health organizations. Whether inequalities are measured on the absolute (difference) or relative (ratio) scale can have a significant impact on judgments about whether health inequalities are increasing or decreasing, bu...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Sam Harper, Nicholas B King, Meredith E Young
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2013-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3656043?pdf=render
id doaj-35fa00de08b7472193f2375057e3e794
record_format Article
spelling doaj-35fa00de08b7472193f2375057e3e7942020-11-24T20:50:00ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032013-01-0185e6336210.1371/journal.pone.0063362Impact of selective evidence presentation on judgments of health inequality trends: an experimental study.Sam HarperNicholas B KingMeredith E YoungReducing health inequalities is a key objective for many governments and public health organizations. Whether inequalities are measured on the absolute (difference) or relative (ratio) scale can have a significant impact on judgments about whether health inequalities are increasing or decreasing, but both of these measures are not often presented in empirical studies. In this study we investigated the impact of selective presentation of health inequality measures on judgments of health inequality trends among 40 university undergraduates. We randomized participants to see either a difference or ratio measure of health inequality alongside raw mortality rates in 5 different scenarios. At baseline there were no differences between treatment groups in assessments of inequality trends, but selective exposure to the same raw data augmented with ratio versus difference inequality graphs altered participants' assessments of inequality change. When absolute inequality decreased and relative inequality increased, exposure to ratio measures increased the probability of concluding that inequality had increased from 32.5% to 70%, but exposure to difference measures did not (35% vs. 25%). Selective exposure to ratio versus difference inequality graphs thus increased the difference between groups in concluding that inequality had increased from 2.5% (95% CI -9.5% to 14.5%) to 45% (95% CI 29.4 to 60.6). A similar pattern was evident for other scenarios where absolute and relative inequality trends gave conflicting results. In cases where measures of absolute and relative inequality both increased or both decreased, we did not find any evidence that assignment to ratio vs. difference graphs had an impact on assessments of inequality change. Selective reporting of measures of health inequality has the potential to create biased judgments of progress in ameliorating health inequalities.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3656043?pdf=render
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Sam Harper
Nicholas B King
Meredith E Young
spellingShingle Sam Harper
Nicholas B King
Meredith E Young
Impact of selective evidence presentation on judgments of health inequality trends: an experimental study.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Sam Harper
Nicholas B King
Meredith E Young
author_sort Sam Harper
title Impact of selective evidence presentation on judgments of health inequality trends: an experimental study.
title_short Impact of selective evidence presentation on judgments of health inequality trends: an experimental study.
title_full Impact of selective evidence presentation on judgments of health inequality trends: an experimental study.
title_fullStr Impact of selective evidence presentation on judgments of health inequality trends: an experimental study.
title_full_unstemmed Impact of selective evidence presentation on judgments of health inequality trends: an experimental study.
title_sort impact of selective evidence presentation on judgments of health inequality trends: an experimental study.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2013-01-01
description Reducing health inequalities is a key objective for many governments and public health organizations. Whether inequalities are measured on the absolute (difference) or relative (ratio) scale can have a significant impact on judgments about whether health inequalities are increasing or decreasing, but both of these measures are not often presented in empirical studies. In this study we investigated the impact of selective presentation of health inequality measures on judgments of health inequality trends among 40 university undergraduates. We randomized participants to see either a difference or ratio measure of health inequality alongside raw mortality rates in 5 different scenarios. At baseline there were no differences between treatment groups in assessments of inequality trends, but selective exposure to the same raw data augmented with ratio versus difference inequality graphs altered participants' assessments of inequality change. When absolute inequality decreased and relative inequality increased, exposure to ratio measures increased the probability of concluding that inequality had increased from 32.5% to 70%, but exposure to difference measures did not (35% vs. 25%). Selective exposure to ratio versus difference inequality graphs thus increased the difference between groups in concluding that inequality had increased from 2.5% (95% CI -9.5% to 14.5%) to 45% (95% CI 29.4 to 60.6). A similar pattern was evident for other scenarios where absolute and relative inequality trends gave conflicting results. In cases where measures of absolute and relative inequality both increased or both decreased, we did not find any evidence that assignment to ratio vs. difference graphs had an impact on assessments of inequality change. Selective reporting of measures of health inequality has the potential to create biased judgments of progress in ameliorating health inequalities.
url http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC3656043?pdf=render
work_keys_str_mv AT samharper impactofselectiveevidencepresentationonjudgmentsofhealthinequalitytrendsanexperimentalstudy
AT nicholasbking impactofselectiveevidencepresentationonjudgmentsofhealthinequalitytrendsanexperimentalstudy
AT mereditheyoung impactofselectiveevidencepresentationonjudgmentsofhealthinequalitytrendsanexperimentalstudy
_version_ 1716805157384093696