BackgroundeHealth literacy is defined as the ability of people to use emerging information and communications technologies to improve or enable health and health care.ObjectiveThe goal of this study was to explore whether literacy disparities are diminished or enhanced in the search for health information on the Internet. The study focused on (1) traditional digital divide variables, such as sociodemographic characteristics, digital access, and digital literacy, (2) information search processes, and (3) the outcomes of Internet use for health information purposes.MethodsWe used a countrywide representative random-digital-dial telephone household survey of the Israeli adult population (18 years and older, N = 4286). We measured eHealth literacy; Internet access; digital literacy; sociodemographic factors; perceived health; presence of chronic diseases; as well as health information sources, content, search strategies, and evaluation criteria used by consumers.ResultsRespondents who were highly eHealth literate tended to be younger and more educated than their less eHealth-literate counterparts. They were also more active consumers of all types of information on the Internet, used more search strategies, and scrutinized information more carefully than did the less eHealth-literate respondents. Finally, respondents who were highly eHealth literate gained more positive outcomes from the information search in terms of cognitive, instrumental (self-management of health care needs, health behaviors, and better use of health insurance), and interpersonal (interacting with their physician) gains.ConclusionsThe present study documented differences between respondents high and low in eHealth literacy in terms of background attributes, information consumption, and outcomes of the information search. The association of eHealth literacy with background attributes indicates that the Internet reinforces existing social differences. The more comprehensive and sophisticated use of the Internet and the subsequent increased gains among the high eHealth literate create new inequalities in the domain of digital health information. There is a need to educate at-risk and needy groups (eg, chronically ill) and to design technology in a mode befitting more consumers.

On the basis of the assumption that positive experiences enhance perceived ability to cope with the discomfort associated with negative performance feedback (NF), it was hypothesized that (a) positive experiences increase willingness to accept negative but useful feedback and that (b) individuals seek positive experiences before accepting NF. Experiment 1 found that past success increased Ss' interest in unrelated NF. Experiment 2 found that positive mood increased Ss' interest in NF. Experiment 3 investigated the amount of time Ss spent reading about their past success while waiting for new feedback. When the new feedback was mandatory, the time Ss spent reading about their past success increased with the anticipated negativity of the new feedback. However, when the new feedback was optional, the time Ss spent reading about their past success was an inverted-U function of the anticipated negativity of the new feedback. Results are discussed in terms of self-control processes.

Students were given lottery tickets and then were asked to exchange their ticket for another one, plus a small monetary incentive. Less than 50% agreed. In contrast, when given pens, and the same exchange offer, over 90% agreed. Experimental control rules out that the reluctance to exchange lottery tickets results (a) from overestimation of the winning probability of one's own ticket; (b) from a concern that the ticket, once exchanged, might win in the hands of another, (c) from an overly low transaction cost; (d) from "paranoia" due to the bizzarreness of the social situation we created; (e) from "bonding" to the ticket. Rather, the possibility for ex post regret that exists when exchanging lottery tickets, but not pens, underlies this reluctance. The notion of regret is broader than previously supposed.

The current article details a position statement and recommendations for future research and practice on planning and implementation intentions in health contexts endorsed by the Synergy Expert Group. The Group comprised world-leading researchers in health and social psychology and behavioural medicine who convened to discuss priority issues in planning interventions in health contexts and develop a set of recommendations for future research and practice. The Expert Group adopted a nominal groups approach and voting system to elicit and structure priority issues in planning interventions and implementation intentions research. Fortytwo priority issues identified in initial discussions were further condensed to 18 key issues, including definitions of planning and implementation intentions and 17 priority research areas.Each issue was subjected to voting for consensus among group members and formed the basis of the position statement and recommendations. Specifically, the Expert Group endorsed statements and recommendations in the following areas: generic definition of planning and specific definition of implementation intentions, recommendations for better testing of mechanisms, guidance on testing the effects of moderators of planning interventions, recommendations on the social aspects of planning interventions, identification of the preconditions that moderate effectiveness of planning interventions, and recommendations for research on how people use plans.

Three studies tested the hypothesis that high levels of motivation facilitate accurate judgments when judgments are relatively easy but debilitate judgments when judgments are relatively difficult. Each study focused on a different judgmental heuristic, and each made use of different motivation and task difficulty manipulations. In all 3 studies, high levels of motivation increased judgmental accuracy in the case of easy judgments and decreased judgmental accuracy in the case of difficult judgments. Theoretical implications and ecological limitations of these findings are discussed.What are the judgmental consequences of being a highly motivated decision maker? Are judges who try especially hard to make accurate judgments rewarded for their efforts, or do they toil in vain? Most contemporary researchers in cognitive and social psychology appear to assume that trying hard to be a good judge is usually rewarded. Discussions of the "speed-accuracy" trade-off in information processing (Fitts, 1966;Pachella, 1974) and the "effort-accuracy" trade-off in judgment and decision making (Kunda, 1990;Payne, Bettman, & Johnson, 1992) explicitly assume that effort and accuracy go hand in hand. Similarly, adaptive analyses of people as "satisficers" or "cognitive misers" (Arkes, 1991;Fiske & Taylor, 1991;Simon, 1957;Tolman, Ritchie, & Kalish, 1946) trade on the assumption that when cognitive investments do occur, they yield judgmental dividends. But do they?Research in social cognition has failed to provide a clear answer to this simple question. Whereas many studies have revealed that highly motivated judges make highly sophisticated inferences (

Abstract. The objective of this paper is to synthesize and update findings from systematic review on health literacy and health outcomes among patients with long-term conditions, and extend the review to the digital domain. Health outcomes include clinical outcomes, processes of care, and health service use. Data sources are the following: (1) studies which appeared in two previous systematic reviews in 2004 and 2011 whose participants were people with long-term conditions or elderly ( n = 54); (2) articles on health literacy and health outcomes identified in an updated 2011–2016 search ( n = 26); (3) articles on eHealth literacy and its association with health outcomes ( n = 8). Strength of evidence was determined by a qualitative assessment of risk of bias, consistency, and directness. There was a lack of consistent evidence on the relationship between health literacy and clinical outcomes despite the consistent evidence on the association with mortality. There was low to insufficient evidence on the association between health literacy and self-rated health/function and emotional states of anxiety and depression, alongside high evidence on lack of association with quality of life. There was insufficient to low evidence on the association between health literacy and behavioral outcomes (medication adherence, other health behaviors) and finally also low to moderate evidence on the association between health literacy and use of health services such as hospitalization and emergency department. In the eHealth literacy domain, there were few studies reporting association with health behaviors and self-rated health with inconsistent results. In conclusion, it is advocated to examine performed heath literacy and eHealth literacy in large longitudinal studies.

BackgroundElectronic health (eHealth) literacy of consumers is essential in order to improve information and communication technology (ICT) use for health purposes by ordinary citizens. However, performed eHealth literacy is seldom studied. Therefore, the present study assessed perceived and performed eHealth literacy using the recent conceptualization of health literacy skills.ObjectiveThe aim of this paper was to examine the association between perceived and performed eHealth literacies.MethodsIn total, 82 Israeli adults participated in the study, all 50 years and older, with a mean age of 67 (SD 11). Of the participants, 60% (49/82) were women and 72% (59/82) had a post-secondary education. The participants were first surveyed and then tested in a computer simulation of health-related Internet tasks. Performed, perceived (eHealth Literacy Scale, eHEALS), and evaluated eHealth literacy were assessed, and performed eHealth literacy was also recorded and re-evaluated later. Performance was scored for successful completion of tasks, and was also assessed by two researchers for motivation, confidence, and amount of help provided.ResultsThe skills of accessing, understanding, appraising, applying, and generating new information had decreasing successful completion rates. Generating new information was least correlated with other skills. Perceived and performed eHealth literacies were moderately correlated (r=.34, P=.01) while facets of performance (ie, digital literacy and eHealth literacy) were highly correlated (r=.82, P<.001). Participants low and high in performed eHealth literacy were significantly different: low performers were older and had used the Internet for less time, required more assistance, and were less confident in their conduct than high performers.ConclusionsThe moderate association between perceived and performed eHealth literacy indicates that the latter should be assessed separately. In as much, the assessment of performed eHealth literacy in clinical settings should entail the structuring of tasks as well as shortening and automatizing the assessment.

One event cannot be more probable than another that includes it. Judging P(A & B) to be higher than P(A) has been called the conjunction fallacy. This study examined a disjunction fallacy. Ss received briefcase descriptions and ordered 7 categories according to 1 of 4 criteria: (a) probability of membership, (b) willingness to bet on membership, (c) inclination to predict membership, and (d) suitability for membership. The list included nested pairs of categories (e.g., Brazil-South America). Ranking a category more probable than its superordinate, or betting on it rather than its superordinate, is fallacious. Prediction, however, may be guided by maximizing informativeness, and suitability need conform to no formal rule. Hence, for these 2 criteria, such a ranking pattern is not fallacious. Yet ranking of categories higher than their superordinates was equally common on all 4 criteria. The results support representativeness against alternative interpretations.The extension rule in probability theory states that if A is a subset of B, then the probability of A cannot exceed that of B. A special case of the extension rule is the conjunction rule, which states that the probability of A&B can exceed the probability of neither A nor B, since it is contained in both.Tversky and Kahneman (1983) demonstrated that, under certain circumstances, people predictably and systematically violate the conjunction rule. In one study, they gave subjects the fol ng description:ida is 31 years old, single, outspoken, and very bright. She maed in philosophy. As a student, she was deeply concerned with aes of discrimination and social justice, and also participated in :i-nuclear demonstrations, (p. 297)This was followed by a list of eight possible outcomes, each describing possible activities of Linda at the present time (her job, her interests, or both). Subjects were asked to rank order the outcomes by the probability that they describe Linda's current activities. Of the eight, one was representative of Linda ("Linda is active in the feminist movement"), one was unrepresentative of Linda ("Linda is a bank teller"), and one was a conjunction of these two ("Linda is a bank teller and is active in the feminist movement"). A large majority of the subjects (85%) rated the conjunctive outcome, "Linda is a bank teller and is active in the feminist movement," more probable than "Linda is a bank teller." This result was predicted from the representativeness hypothesis: "Representativeness is an assessment of the degree of correspondence between a sample and a population, an instance and a category, an act and an actor or, more generally, between