Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Appears in Collections:Psychology Journal Articles
Peer Review Status: Refereed
Title: Preference for deliberation and perceived usefulness of standard- and narrative-style leaflet designs: Implications for equitable cancer-screening communication
Author(s): Robb, Kathryn
Gatting, Lauren P
von Wagner, Christian
McGregor, Lesley M
Contact Email:
Keywords: colorectal cancer
cancer screening
decision making
human information processing
dual-process theory
Issue Date: Mar-2020
Citation: Robb K, Gatting LP, von Wagner C & McGregor LM (2020) Preference for deliberation and perceived usefulness of standard- and narrative-style leaflet designs: Implications for equitable cancer-screening communication. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 54 (3), p. 193–201.
Abstract: Background: In the United Kingdom, cancer screening invitations are mailed with information styled in a standard, didactic way to allow for informed choice. Information processing theory suggests this ‘standard-style’ could be more appealing to people who prefer deliberative thinking. People less likely to engage in deliberative thinking may be disenfranchised by the design of current standard-style information. Purpose: To examine the distribution of preference for deliberative thinking across demographic groups (Study 1), and explore associations between preference for deliberative thinking and perceived usefulness of standard- and narrative-style screening information (Study 2). Methods: Study 1, adults aged 45-59 (n = 4,241) were mailed a questionnaire via primary care assessing preference for deliberative thinking and demographic characteristics. Study 2, a separate cohort of adults aged 45-59 (n = 2,058) were mailed standard- and narrative-style leaflets, and a questionnaire assessing demographic characteristics, preference for deliberative thinking and perceived leaflet usefulness. Data were analysed using multiple regression. Results: In Studies 1 (n=1,783) and 2 (n=650), having lower socioeconomic status, being a women and of non-white ethnicity was associated with lower preference for deliberative thinking. In Study 2, the standard-style leaflet was perceived as less useful among participants with lower preference for deliberative thinking, while perceived usefulness of the narrative-style leaflet did not differ by preference for deliberative thinking. Conclusions: Information leaflets using a standard-style may disadvantage women and those experiencing greater socio-economic deprivation. More work is required to identify design styles that have a greater appeal for people with low preference for deliberative thinking.
DOI Link: 10.1093/abm/kaz039
Rights: This item has been embargoed for a period. During the embargo please use the Request a Copy feature at the foot of the Repository record to request a copy directly from the author. You can only request a copy if you wish to use this work for your own research or private study. This is a pre-copyedited, author-produced PDF of an article accepted for publication in Annals of Behavioral Medicine following peer review. The version of record Kathryn A Robb, PhD, Lauren P Gatting, BSc, Christian von Wagner, PhD, Lesley M McGregor, PhD, Preference for Deliberation and Perceived Usefulness of Standard- and Narrative-Style Leaflet Designs: Implications for Equitable Cancer-Screening Communication, Annals of Behavioral Medicine, Volume 54, Issue 3, March 2020, Pages 193–201, is available online at:

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Manuscript_4_for GUlib.pdfFulltext - Accepted Version486.01 kBAdobe PDFView/Open

This item is protected by original copyright

Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.